Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

Table 1A","Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil by PAD District (Domestic  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

A","Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil by PAD District (Domestic)" A","Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil by PAD District (Domestic)" ,"(Dollars per Barrel)" ,,," "," " ,,,"Previous ","Final" "Frequency","Date","Area","Price","Price","Difference" "Annual",2010,"PAD District 2",78.7,78.85,0.15 ,,"PAD District 4",73.65,73.56,-0.09 ,,"U.S.",77.96,78.01,0.05 ,2011,"PAD District 3",103.19,103.24,0.05 ,,"PAD District 2",96.82,96.81,-0.01 ,,"PAD District 4",89.36,89.34,-0.02 ,,"U.S.",100.74,100.71,-0.03 ,,"PAD District 5",103.85,103.83,-0.02 "Month","application/vnd.ms-excel","PAD District 4",73.68,72.66,-1.02

2

Table 24. Refining Industry Energy Consumption  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

- Corrections to Tables 24 to 32 - Corrections to Tables 24 to 32 Table 24. Refining Industry Energy Consumption 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2002- 2025 Carbon Dioxide Emissions 4/ (million metric tons) 190.4 185.7 188.0 191.3 207.3 215.6 220.0 222.8 225.1 226.3 228.0 230.7 234.1 237.5 238.5 239.4 239.4 238.6 240.6 240.5 242.2 244.2 245.9 246.3 246.6 1.2% Table 25. Food Industry Energy Consumption 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2002- 2025 Carbon Dioxide Emissions 3/ (million metric tons) 87.8 89.4 87.5 87.8 89.2 90.2 90.9 91.4 92.2 93.5 94.5 95.7 96.7 97.7 98.6 99.6 100.8 101.9 102.9 104.1 105.4 107.0 108.7 110.3 112.1 1.0% Table 26. Paper Industry Energy Consumption 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

3

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State 262 Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type,...

4

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State 262 Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1997 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type,...

5

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1998 Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Thousand Gallons per...

6

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1995 Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Cents per Gallon Excluding...

7

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1999 Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Thousand Gallons per...

8

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

- - - - W W - - - - - - See footnotes at end of table. 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type, PAD District, and State 292 Energy Information...

9

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1999 Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Cents per Gallon Excluding...

10

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1995 Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Thousand Gallons per...

11

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1998 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Thousand Gallons per Day) -...

12

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1998 Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Cents per Gallon Excluding...

13

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1995 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Thousand Gallons per Day) -...

14

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1999 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State (Thousand Gallons per Day) -...

15

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

133.6 - 276.4 See footnotes at end of table. 220 Energy Information AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 2000 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type,...

16

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

201.3 - 453.3 See footnotes at end of table. 262 Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1995 Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type,...

17

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2,026.7 W W 234.5 161.7 - 396.3 See footnotes at end of table. 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State 262 Energy Information...

18

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2,222.4 W W 206.4 134.3 - 340.7 See footnotes at end of table. 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State 262 Energy Information...

19

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

W W 78.6 W 85.7 81.8 W 69.3 73.8 See footnotes at end of table. 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District and State 176 Energy Information...

20

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

W 70.5 78.9 W 76.0 83.6 W 69.2 75.2 See footnotes at end of table. 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District and State 176 Energy Information...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1998 295 Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil Volumes by PAD District and State (Thousand Gallons per Day) -...

22

Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1999 295 Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil Volumes by PAD District and State (Thousand Gallons per Day) -...

23

Table A2. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Marketing Annual 1995 467 Table A2. RefinerReseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane, and Kerosene, by PAD District, 1983-Present (Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes) -...

24

Table A2. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Marketing Annual 1999 421 Table A2. RefinerReseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane, and Kerosene, by PAD District, 1983-Present (Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes) -...

25

Table A1. Refiner/Reseller Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, PAD...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

AdministrationPetroleum Marketing Annual 1999 401 Table A1. RefinerReseller Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, PAD District and State, 1984-Present (Cents per Gallon Excluding...

26

Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

W 839.2 135.0 1,251.9 See footnotes at end of table. 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil Volumes by PAD District and State Energy Information Administration...

27

Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

W 1,039.3 132.9 1,418.3 See footnotes at end of table. 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil Volumes by PAD District and State Energy Information Administration...

28

Table A2. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

- W 73.5 See footnotes at end of table. A2. RefinerReseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane, and Kerosene, by PAD District, 1983-Present Energy Information Administration ...

29

Table A1. Refiner/Reseller Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, PAD...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

78.2 101.8 83.6 87.5 74.7 See footnotes at end of table. A1. RefinerReseller Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, PAD District, and State, 1984-Present 452 Energy Information...

30

Table 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Prices," source for backcast estimates prior to January 1983. 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices 36 Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996...

31

Table 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Prices," source for backcast estimates prior to January 1983. 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices 36 Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1997...

32

EIA Energy Efficiency-Table 1a. Table 1a. Consumption of Site Energy For  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

a a Page Last Modified: May 2010 Table 1a. Consumption of Energy (Site Energy) for All Purposes (First Use) for Selected Industries, 1998, 2002, and 2006 (Trillion Btu) MECS Survey Years NAICS Subsector and Industry 1998 2002 2006 311 Food 1,044 1,123 1,186 312 Beverage and Tobacco Products 108 105 107 313 Textile Mills 256 207 178 314 Textile Product Mills 50 60 72 315 Apparel 48 30 14 316 Leather and Allied Products 8 7 3 321 Wood Products 509 377 451 322 Paper 2,747 2,363 2,354 323 Printing and Related Support 98 98 85 324 Petroleum and Coal Products 7,320 6,799 6,864 325 Chemicals 6,064 6,465 5,149 326 Plastics and Rubber Products 328 351 337 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Products 979 1,059 1,114 331 Primary Metals 2,560 2,120 1,736

33

Table 3a. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

a. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected Price in Constant Dollars" " constant dollars per barrel in ""dollar year"" specific to each...

34

Table 3b. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

b. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual" "Projected Price in Nominal Dollars" " nominal dollars per barrel" ,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000...

35

Table 1a. Effective, Occupied, and Vacant Square Footage, 1992  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

a. Occupied and Vacant Sq Ft a. Occupied and Vacant Sq Ft Table 1a. Effective, Occupied, and Vacant Square Footage, 1992 Building Characteristics All Buildings (thousand) Total Floorspace (million square feet) Total Occupied Floorspace (million square feet) Total Vacant Floorspace (million square feet) Occupied Square Footage as a Percent of Total All Buildings 4,779 67,072 61,325 5,746 91 Building Floorspace (Square Feet) 1,001 to 5,000 2,678 7,321 6,662 659 90 5,001 to 10,000 966 7,140 6,544 596 91 10,001 to 25,000 641 10,285 9,432 853 91 25,001 to 50,000 274 9,872 8,963 909 90 50,001 to 100,000 114 7,957 7,297 659 91 100,001 to 200,000 70 9,619 8,966 652 93 200,001 to 500,000 25 7,788 7,201 586 92 Over 500,000 9 7,087 6,257 829 88 Principal Building Activity Education 309 8,815 8,221 593 93 Food Sales and Service 413 2,375 2,166

36

Table 3b. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

b. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual b. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual Projected Price in Nominal Dollars (nominal dollars per barrel) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 AEO 1994 17.06 17.21 18.24 19.43 20.64 22.12 23.76 25.52 27.51 29.67 31.86 34.00 36.05 38.36 40.78 43.29 45.88 48.37 AEO 1995 15.24 17.27 18.23 19.26 20.39 21.59 22.97 24.33 25.79 27.27 28.82 30.38 32.14 33.89 35.85 37.97 40.28 AEO 1996 17.16 17.74 18.59 19.72 20.97 22.34 23.81 25.26 26.72 28.22 29.87 31.51 33.13 34.82 36.61 38.48 40.48

37

Table 3a. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

a. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual a. Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil, Projected vs. Actual Projected Price in Constant Dollars (constant dollars per barrel in "dollar year" specific to each AEO) AEO Dollar Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 AEO 1994 1992 16.69 16.43 16.99 17.66 18.28 19.06 19.89 20.72 21.65 22.61 23.51 24.29 24.90 25.60 26.30 27.00 27.64 28.16 AEO 1995 1993 14.90 16.41 16.90 17.45 18.00 18.53 19.13 19.65 20.16 20.63 21.08 21.50 21.98 22.44 22.94 23.50 24.12 AEO 1996 1994 16.81 16.98 17.37 17.98 18.61 19.27 19.92 20.47 20.97 21.41 21.86 22.25 22.61 22.97 23.34 23.70 24.08

38

Table 1. A survey of bicycle experience from 208 National Taiwan University students who use or have used a bicycle  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Table 1. A survey of bicycle experience from 208 National Taiwan University students who use or have used a bicycle Questions Avg. Answer What is the total period that you ride a bike in campus? 2 and Participatory Sensing ABSTRACT Bicycle theft has been a well-known issue for many years. This study presents

Ouhyoung, Ming

39

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Cost Report." Figure Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996 3 Table 2. U.S. Refiner Prices of Petroleum Products to End Users (Cents per Gallon...

40

Refiner Crude Oil Inputs  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Day) Refiner Percent Operable Utilization Net Inputs (Refiner and Blender) of Motor Gasoline Blending Comp Net Inputs (Refiner and Blender) of RBOB Blending Components Net...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Vacuum State/Refiner/Location  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Vacuum Vacuum State/Refiner/Location Barrels per Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity Barrels per Operating Idle Operating Idle Downstream Charge Capacity Thermal Cracking Delayed Fluid Coking Visbreaking Other/Gas Calendar Day Stream Day Distillation Coking Oil Table 3. Capacity of Operable Petroleum Refineries by State as of January 1, 2013 (Barrels per Stream Day, Except Where Noted) ......................................................... Alabama 120,100 0 130,000 0 48,000 32,000 0 0 0 Goodway Refining LLC 4,100 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 ....................................................................................................................................................................................................

42

Table Search (or Ranking Tables)  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

;Table Search #3 #12;Outline · Goals of table search · Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3 search Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3: (setup): Fusion Tables · Table search #2: WebTables ­Version 1: modify document search ­Version 2: recover table semantics #12;Searching the Deep Web store

Halevy, Alon

43

ITP Petroleum Refining: Energy Bandwidth for Petroleum Refining...  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Bandwidth for Petroleum Refining Processes ITP Petroleum Refining: Energy Bandwidth for Petroleum Refining Processes bandwidth.pdf More Documents & Publications ITP Petroleum...

44

ITP Petroleum Refining: Profile of the Petroleum Refining Industry...  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Profile of the Petroleum Refining Industry in California: California Industries of the Future Program ITP Petroleum Refining: Profile of the Petroleum Refining Industry in...

45

MECS 2006- Petroleum Refining  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Petroleum Refining (NAICS 324110) Sector with Total Energy Input, October 2012 (MECS 2006)

46

Petroleum Refining | Department of Energy  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Petroleum Refining Petroleum Refining Maintaining the viability of the U.S. petroleum refining industry requires continuous improvement in productivity and energy efficiency. The...

47

Biocatalysis in Oil Refining  

SciTech Connect

Biocatalysis in Oil Refining focuses on petroleum refining bioprocesses, establishing a connection between science and technology. The micro organisms and biomolecules examined for biocatalytic purposes for oil refining processes are thoroughly detailed. Terminology used by biologists, chemists and engineers is brought into a common language, aiding the understanding of complex biological-chemical-engineering issues. Problems to be addressed by the future R&D activities and by new technologies are described and summarized in the last chapter.

Borole, Abhijeet P [ORNL; Ramirez-Corredores, M. M. [BP Global Fuels Technology

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

48

Valero Refining Company - NJ | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Valero Refining Company - NJ Valero Refining Company - NJ Jump to: navigation, search Name Valero Refining Company - NJ Place New Jersey Utility Id 56325 Utility Location Yes Ownership R Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes References EIA Form EIA-861 Final Data File for 2010 - File1_a[1] LinkedIn Connections CrunchBase Profile No CrunchBase profile. Create one now! This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility Rate Schedules Grid-background.png No rate schedules available. Average Rates Industrial: $0.0652/kWh References ↑ "EIA Form EIA-861 Final Data File for 2010 - File1_a" Retrieved from "http://en.openei.org/w/index.php?title=Valero_Refining_Company_-_NJ&oldid=411921" Categories: EIA Utility Companies and Aliases

49

Environmental Regulations and Changes in Petroleum Refining Operations  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Environmental Regulations and Environmental Regulations and Changes in Petroleum Refining Operations By Tancred C.M. Lidderdale Contents * Introduction * Motor Gasoline Summer Volatility (RVP) Regulations o Table 1. Summer Volatility Regulations for Motor Gasoline o Table 2. Refinery Inputs and Production of Normal Butane o Figure 1. Refinery Inputs and Production of Normal Butane o Table 3. Price Relationship Between Normal Butane and Motor Gasoline o Table 4. Market Price Premium for Low Vapor Pressure (RVP) Gasoline * Oxygenate Content of Motor Gasoline o Figure 2. Oxygenate Content of Motor Gasoline o Table 5. Oxygenated and Conventional Motor Gasoline Price Relationship o Table 6. Reformulated and Conventional Motor Gasoline Price Relationship o Figure 3. Price Differences Between RFG or MTBE and Conventional Gasoline

50

Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook - Errata  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2003 2003 There were two corrections to Table 117 in the Annual Energy Outlook 2003 Supplemental Tables: 1. The Total rows for all three table sections (Crude Oil, Light Refined Products, and Heavy Refined Products) were adjusted to accurately reflect the summation of the regions listed in the section. (Change made on 3/20/2003) 2. The final column, representing the growth rate from 2001 to 2025, for the Heavy Refined Products section was corrected. (Change made on 3/20/2003) 3. The regional sulfur dioxide emissions in the Annual Energy Outlook 2003 supplemental tables 60-72 were updated. Previously, this row in each table had contained the national total. (Change made on 4/7/03) 4. Supplement tables 60-73 were updated to correct Fuel Consumption for Petroleum, Natural Gas,

51

Hirshfeld atom refinement  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The new automated iterative Hirshfeld atom refinement method is explained and validated through comparison of structural models of Gly-L-Ala obtained from synchrotron X-ray and neutron diffraction data at 12, 50, 150 and 295 K. Structural parameters involving hydrogen atoms are determined with comparable precision from both experiments and agree mostly to within two combined standard uncertainties.

Capelli, S.C.

2014-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

52

Issues in adaptive mesh refinement  

SciTech Connect

In this paper, we present an approach for a patch-based adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) for multi-physics simulations. The approach consists of clustering, symmetry preserving, mesh continuity, flux correction, communications, and management of patches. Among the special features of this patch-based AMR are symmetry preserving, efficiency of refinement, special implementation offlux correction, and patch management in parallel computing environments. Here, higher efficiency of refinement means less unnecessarily refined cells for a given set of cells to be refined. To demonstrate the capability of the AMR framework, hydrodynamics simulations with many levels of refinement are shown in both two- and three-dimensions.

Dai, William Wenlong [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

53

Petroleum Refining (2010 MECS) | Department of Energy  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Petroleum Refining (2010 MECS) Petroleum Refining (2010 MECS) Manufacturing Energy and Carbon Footprint for Petroleum Refining Sector (NAICS 324110) Energy use data source: 2010...

54

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8,502.8 8,502.8 30,091.1 22,860.9 121,863.2 24,529.2 169,253.3 7,955.3 8,081.1 12,658.5 10,618.5 1,152.7 24,429.7 February ............................. 33,160.7 35,054.9 31,625.2 135,105.9 26,023.8 192,754.9 5,205.4 5,273.9 5,951.6 5,714.2 333.0 11,998.8 March .................................. 37,159.8 39,011.8 35,012.6 142,409.7 27,404.1 204,826.5 2,090.0 2,127.2 2,619.4 2,344.1 - 4,963.5 April .................................... 38,869.0 40,735.1 36,827.8 142,606.1 26,540.1 205,973.9 568.3 580.0 980.8 1,461.1 - 2,442.0 May ..................................... 39,582.4 41,396.9 37,319.3 150,843.9 27,558.2 215,721.4 573.6 584.7 957.5 1,537.7 - 2,495.2 June .................................... 40,991.9 42,912.3 37,954.3 156,346.5 32,447.1 226,747.9 591.6 592.0 990.8 1,609.0 -

55

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

220.9 220.9 31,104.3 23,193.9 128,995.0 28,849.6 181,038.6 5,089.3 5,164.2 4,062.8 5,720.8 - 9,783.6 February ............................. 31,284.4 33,213.6 24,062.8 134,673.5 33,175.3 191,911.6 4,908.5 4,980.9 4,025.8 5,317.8 - 9,343.6 March .................................. 34,100.8 36,002.0 25,985.0 139,340.5 30,160.8 195,486.2 2,710.3 2,764.7 2,622.6 2,796.9 - 5,419.5 April .................................... 35,684.3 37,877.0 27,895.8 146,733.8 29,409.3 204,038.9 1,203.7 1,224.2 652.4 2,016.6 - 2,669.0 May ..................................... 35,150.2 36,866.7 27,401.6 148,271.7 28,449.3 204,122.6 1,711.4 1,730.6 1,284.0 2,091.9 - 3,375.9 June .................................... 36,536.0 38,235.2 27,402.2 151,739.3 24,832.7 203,974.3 1,956.2 1,978.1

56

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4,707.0 4,707.0 35,821.0 18,450.2 130,177.8 22,726.5 171,354.5 3,900.7 3,926.0 4,696.8 7,088.7 - 11,785.5 February ............................. 36,412.6 37,699.7 20,174.0 142,313.8 25,388.9 187,876.8 3,924.9 3,949.8 5,137.3 6,882.9 - 12,020.2 March .................................. 36,632.6 38,121.0 21,255.9 152,151.5 30,915.0 204,322.3 3,382.2 3,401.8 4,711.1 5,122.9 - 9,833.9 April .................................... 37,971.4 39,384.5 23,410.4 155,157.1 40,216.9 218,784.4 1,927.8 1,934.5 1,997.5 3,438.3 - 5,435.9 May ..................................... 37,771.0 39,109.5 22,504.7 154,536.5 34,938.2 211,979.5 1,944.7 1,953.1 1,570.1 3,450.5 - 5,020.5 June .................................... 37,777.7 38,969.0 22,350.8 163,781.5 29,805.1 215,937.4 2,027.1

57

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

161.3 161.3 30,767.0 22,353.2 127,342.1 24,284.9 173,980.2 8,319.4 8,460.9 13,456.3 W W 24,653.0 February ............................. 32,286.1 34,080.3 31,066.3 138,106.2 29,977.1 199,149.6 6,264.3 6,341.7 6,239.1 5,890.3 - 12,129.4 March .................................. 36,529.7 38,362.8 35,134.3 141,063.5 25,588.4 201,786.1 2,972.7 3,032.6 2,589.4 W W 4,958.5 April .................................... 36,904.9 38,994.6 31,715.8 147,020.0 33,979.9 212,715.8 1,558.8 1,592.8 1,049.5 1,668.8 - 2,718.3 May ..................................... 36,751.1 38,541.5 28,743.2 148,337.4 29,640.9 206,721.5 1,299.8 1,333.0 1,005.5 1,838.7 - 2,844.3 June .................................... 37,465.1 39,108.4 28,592.7 147,682.3 36,046.6 212,321.6

58

Table 44. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Formulation, Sales Type,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3,177.2 3,177.2 34,690.6 19,370.8 133,144.1 32,691.0 185,205.9 4,123.8 4,154.0 3,780.0 6,946.2 - 10,726.2 February ............................. 34,982.2 36,460.3 20,433.1 137,937.1 31,470.5 189,840.6 3,923.6 3,954.4 3,674.9 6,513.4 - 10,188.4 March .................................. 37,598.4 39,137.5 21,474.3 144,372.0 29,697.5 195,543.8 2,947.2 2,972.1 3,243.6 4,126.4 - 7,370.0 April .................................... 34,901.4 36,438.7 22,519.1 148,658.4 39,120.8 210,298.2 2,159.0 2,174.7 1,880.2 3,562.0 - 5,442.2 May ..................................... 35,698.2 37,200.2 22,890.9 150,690.5 35,704.2 209,285.5 2,007.8 2,022.5 1,824.9 3,446.9 - 5,271.8 June .................................... 36,351.1 37,897.0 23,252.4 157,837.8 38,644.7 219,734.8 2,006.0

59

Table 45. Refiner Volumes of Aviation Fuels, Kerosene, No. 1...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

145.8 461.3 48,876.2 13,893.0 268.5 3,966.8 391.5 3,072.0 3,773.6 35,832.0 December ... 138.2 466.6 49,701.7 14,199.8 342.2 4,861.0 599.8 3,200.2...

60

Table 45. Refiner Volumes of Aviation Fuels, Kerosene, No. 1...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

... 64.5 101.3 12,742.5 2,029.5 190.8 2,042.2 12.7 38.0 91.2 4,874.9 December ... 57.1 89.7 13,275.8 2,017.6 210.4 2,595.6 26.2 58.1 112.5...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

Table 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

32.1 29.6 25.7 32.2 28.7 November ... 38.1 30.7 27.5 22.5 30.5 26.2 December ... 35.1 27.5 25.8 21.8 29.2 24.8 1993...

62

Table 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

31.0 28.1 27.0 29.7 28.2 November ... 33.6 27.3 28.9 25.1 30.5 26.0 December ... 31.9 24.0 24.5 23.0 26.8 23.3 1998...

63

Table 19. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

January 1983 forward; Form EIA-460, "Petroleum Industry Monthly Report for Product Prices," source for backcast estimates prior to January 1983. 36 Energy Information...

64

Minimally refined biomass fuel  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A minimally refined fluid composition, suitable as a fuel mixture and derived from biomass material, is comprised of one or more water-soluble carbohydrates such as sucrose, one or more alcohols having less than four carbons, and water. The carbohydrate provides the fuel source; water solubilizes the carbohydrates; and the alcohol aids in the combustion of the carbohydrate and reduces the vicosity of the carbohydrate/water solution. Because less energy is required to obtain the carbohydrate from the raw biomass than alcohol, an overall energy savings is realized compared to fuels employing alcohol as the primary fuel.

Pearson, Richard K. (Pleasanton, CA); Hirschfeld, Tomas B. (Livermore, CA)

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

65

Weekly Refiner Net Production  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Refiner Net Production Refiner Net Production (Thousand Barrels per Day) Period: Weekly 4-Week Average Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Product/Region 11/08/13 11/15/13 11/22/13 11/29/13 12/06/13 12/13/13 View History Finished Motor Gasoline 2,168 2,300 2,336 2,359 2,462 2,368 2010-2013 East Coast (PADD 1) 54 53 52 67 71 67 2010-2013 Midwest (PADD 2) 696 745 722 711 798 790 2010-2013 Gulf Coast (PADD 3) 891 916 1,010 1,053 1,011 1,021 2010-2013 Rocky Mountain (PADD 4) 260 248 245 232 279 235 2010-2013 West Coast (PADD 5) 268 338 308 296 302 255 2010-2013 Reformulated 50 49 49 49 48 49 2010-2013 Blended with Ethanol 50 49 49 49 48 49 2010-2013 Other

66

Conversion Tables  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Contents taken from Glossary: Carbon Dioxide and Climate, 1990. ORNL/CDIAC-39, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Third Edition. Edited by: Fred O'Hara Jr. 1 - International System of Units (SI) Prefixes 2 - Useful Quantities in CO2 3 - Common Conversion Factors 4 - Common Energy Unit Conversion Factors 5 - Geologic Time Scales 6 - Factors and Units for Calculating Annual CO2 Emissions Using Global Fuel Production Data Table 1. International System of Units (SI) Prefixes Prefix SI Symbol Multiplication Factor exa E 1018 peta P 1015 tera T 1012 giga G 109 mega M 106 kilo k 103 hecto h 102 deka da 10 deci d 10-1 centi c 10-2

67

ITP Petroleum Refining: Energy Bandwidth for Petroleum Refining Processes  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

This energy bandwidth analysis provides a realistic estimate of the energy that may be saved in petroleum refining processes by quantifying measures of energy consumption.

68

ITP Petroleum Refining: Energy Bandwidth for Petroleum Refining...  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Refining Processes Prepared by Energetics Incorporated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Industrial Technologies Program...

69

Former Corporation/Refiner Total Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Former Corporation/Refiner Former Corporation/Refiner Total Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity (bbl/cd) New Corporation/Refiner Date of Sale Table 12. Refinery Sales During 2012 Antelope Refining LLC Garco Energy LLC 3/12 Douglas, WY 3,800 Delta Air Lines/Monroe Energy LLC ConocoPhillips Company 4/12 Trainer, PA 185,000 Phillips 66 Company ConocoPhillips Company 5/12 Belle Chasse, LA 252,000 Billings, MT 59,000 Ferndale, WA 101,000 Linden, NJ 238,000 Ponca City, OK 198,400 Rodeo, CA 120,200 Sweeny, TX 247,000 Westlake, LA 239,400 Wilmington, CA 139,000 Nustar Asphalt LLC (50% Nustar Energy LP and 50% Lindsay Goldberg LLC) Nustar Energy LP/Nustar Asphalt Refining LLC 9/12 Paulsboro, NJ 70,000 Savannah, GA 28,000 Carlyle Group/Philadelphia Energy Solutions Refining and Marketing LLC Sunoco Inc./Sunoco Inc. R&M

70

Refines Efficiency Improvement  

SciTech Connect

Refinery processes that convert heavy oils to lighter distillate fuels require heating for distillation, hydrogen addition or carbon rejection (coking). Efficiency is limited by the formation of insoluble carbon-rich coke deposits. Heat exchangers and other refinery units must be shut down for mechanical coke removal, resulting in a significant loss of output and revenue. When a residuum is heated above the temperature at which pyrolysis occurs (340 C, 650 F), there is typically an induction period before coke formation begins (Magaril and Aksenova 1968, Wiehe 1993). To avoid fouling, refiners often stop heating a residuum before coke formation begins, using arbitrary criteria. In many cases, this heating is stopped sooner than need be, resulting in less than maximum product yield. Western Research Institute (WRI) has developed innovative Coking Index concepts (patent pending) which can be used for process control by refiners to heat residua to the threshold, but not beyond the point at which coke formation begins when petroleum residua materials are heated at pyrolysis temperatures (Schabron et al. 2001). The development of this universal predictor solves a long standing problem in petroleum refining. These Coking Indexes have great potential value in improving the efficiency of distillation processes. The Coking Indexes were found to apply to residua in a universal manner, and the theoretical basis for the indexes has been established (Schabron et al. 2001a, 2001b, 2001c). For the first time, a few simple measurements indicates how close undesired coke formation is on the coke formation induction time line. The Coking Indexes can lead to new process controls that can improve refinery distillation efficiency by several percentage points. Petroleum residua consist of an ordered continuum of solvated polar materials usually referred to as asphaltenes dispersed in a lower polarity solvent phase held together by intermediate polarity materials usually referred to as resins. The Coking Indexes focus on the amount of these intermediate polarity species since coke formation begins when these are depleted. Currently the Coking Indexes are determined by either titration or solubility measurements which must be performed in a laboratory. In the current work, various spectral, microscopic, and thermal techniques possibly leading to on-line analysis were explored for measuring the Coking Indexes.

WRI

2002-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

71

Refiner Wholesale Price ...........................  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Prices (cents per gallon) Prices (cents per gallon) Refiner Wholesale Price ........................... 297 299 302 275 289 290 288 262 275 289 280 257 293 282 276 Gasoline Regular Grade Retail Prices Including Taxes PADD 1 .................................................... 363 366 364 355 361 350 355 331 341 355 347 327 362 349 343 PADD 2 .................................................... 355 366 369 340 350 368 352 318 334 355 346 318 357 347 338 PADD 3 .................................................... 346 353 345 326 339 336 337 307 323 341 329 305 343 330 325 PADD 4 .................................................... 322 374 358 348 323 361 362 326 322 351 348 322 351 344 337 PADD 5 .................................................... 390 413 390 384 382 390 385 355 362 384 379 356 394 378 371 U.S. Average ........................................

72

Re-refining in India  

SciTech Connect

The Indian Institute of Petroleum, Dehra Dun made available its know-how for re-refining used engine oil to about 30 entrepreneurs. Out of these only a handful are utilizing their process. However, there are about 30 members in Petroleum Re-Refiners Association of India. After the certification scheme, as announced by the Ministry of Petroleum, is completed, a true picture would emerge as to the actual number of re-refiners engaged in the proper re-refining of used engine oil. The total consumption of lubricants in India is 500,000 tons of which about 5 percent maximum comes to the recognized re-refining industry and the balance is either burnt or discarded. The Government of India has been encouraging in particular the Government undertakings to set up their own captive units for re-refining but these have not been so successful and the output of captive units is used for topping up purpose. With the establishment of a re-refined engine oil specification and registration of the re-refiners it is hoped that the Government will take a more positive step in encouraging the re-refining industry.

Bhargava, M.K.

1980-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

73

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format Excel logo Spreadsheets are provided in excel 1 to117 - Complete set of Supplemental Tables PDF Energy Consumption by Sector (Census Division) Table 1. New England XLS PDF Table 2. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 3. East North Central XLS PDF Table 4. West North Central XLS PDF Table 5. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 6. East South Central XLS PDF Table 7. West South Central XLS PDF Table 8. Mountain XLS PDF Table 9. Pacific XLS PDF Table 10. Total United States XLS PDF Energy Prices by Sector (Census Division) Table 11. New England XLS PDF Table 12. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 13. East North Central XLS PDF Table 14. West North Central XLS PDF Table 15. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 16. East South Central

74

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

i i ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 4 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 6 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) .................... 6

75

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS OF SMART GRID TECHNOLOGIES October 5, 2010 i Table of Contents I. Introduction and Executive Summary.......................................................... 1 a. Overview of Smart Grid Benefits and Communications Needs................. 2 b. Summary of Recommendations .................................................................... 5 II. Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives ................................................ 7 a. DOE Request for Information ....................................................................... 7 b. Other Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives .................................... 9 III. Communications Requirements of Smart Grid Applications .................. 11 a. Advanced Metering Infrastructure ............................................................12

76

EASURING IMPROVEMENT IN THE ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF THE U.S. CORN REFINING INDUSTRY  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

| P | P a g e MEASURING IMPROVEMENT IN THE ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF THE U.S. CORN REFINING INDUSTRY SPONSORED BY THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AS PART OF THE ENERGY STAR® PROGRAM GALE A. BOYD AND CHRISTIAN DELGADO DUKE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS BOX 90097, DURHAM, NC 27708 JULY 10, 2012 2 | P a g e MEASURING IMPROVEMENT IN THE ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF THE U.S. CORN REFINING INDUSTRY CONTENTS Figures .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Tables ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

77

1992 CBECS Detailed Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables To download all 1992 detailed tables: Download Acrobat Reader for viewing PDF files. Yellow Arrow Buildings Characteristics Tables (PDF format) (70 tables, 230 pages, file size 1.39 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables (PDF format) (47 tables, 208 pages, file size 1.28 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy End-Use Tables (PDF format) (6 tables, 6 pages, file size 31.7 KB) Detailed tables for other years: Yellow Arrow 1999 CBECS Yellow Arrow 1995 CBECS Background information on detailed tables: Yellow Arrow Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Yellow Arrow Statistical Significance of Data 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) Detailed Tables Data from the 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables:

78

Refinement in Object-Z and CSP  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

In this paper we explore the relationship between refinement in Object-Z and refinement in CSP. We prove with a simple counter-example ... , does not imply failures-divergences refinement in CSP. This contradicts...

Christie Bolton; Jim Davies

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

79

Anomalies in the refinement of isoleucine  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The side-chain torsion angles of isoleucines in X-ray protein structures are a function of resolution, secondary structure and refinement software. Detailing the standard torsion angles used in refinement software can improve protein structure refinement.

Berntsen, K.R.M.

2014-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

80

Table 25  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

89 89 Table 25 Created on: 1/3/2014 3:10:33 PM Table 25. Natural gas home customer-weighted heating degree days, New England Middle Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic Month/Year/Type of data CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT NJ, NY, PA IL, IN, MI, OH, WI IA, KS, MN, MO, ND, NE, SD DE, FL, GA, MD, DC, NC, SC, VA, WV November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0 November to November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

Nucleic Acid Standards - Refinement Parameters  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Refinement Parameters Refinement Parameters The DNA/RNA topology and parameter files for X-PLOR are shown below. These were tested with DNA structures and with protein-DNA complexes. X-PLOR topology file X-PLOR parameter files: X-PLOR parameter file For the refinement of high resolution structures (< 1.7 Angstroms) the parameter file with distinct bond distances and bond angles for both C2'-endo and C3'-endo conformations should be considered: X-PLOR parameter file for high resolution structures "New Parameters for the Refinement of Nucleic Acid Containing Structures." Gary Parkinson, Jaroslav Vojtechovsky, Lester Clowney, Axel Brunger*, and Helen M. Berman. (1996) Acta Cryst. D 52, 57-64 Rutgers University, Department of Chemistry, Piscataway, NJ 08855-0939; *The Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Departments of Molecular and

82

NORTHEAST REGIONAL REFINED PETROLEUM PRODUCT RESERVE | Department...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

NORTHEAST REGIONAL REFINED PETROLEUM PRODUCT RESERVE NORTHEAST REGIONAL REFINED PETROLEUM PRODUCT RESERVE The Northeast region of the U.S. is particularly vulnerable to gasoline...

83

Improving the accuracy of macromolecular structure refinement  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

and subsequent refinement is challenging at low resolution. We compared refinement methods using synchrotron diffraction data of photosystem I at 7.4 resolution, starting...

84

chapter 5. Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

5. Detailed Tables 5. Detailed Tables Chapter 5. Detailed Tables The following tables present detailed characteristics of vehicles in the residential sector. Data are from the 1994 Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey. Table Organization The "Detailed Tables" section consists of three types of tables: (1) Tables of totals such as number of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) or gallons consumed; (2) tables of per household statistics such as VMT per household; and (3) tables of per-vehicle statistics, such as vehicle fuel consumption per vehicle. The tables have been grouped together by specific topics such as model-year data or family-income data to facilitate finding related information. The Quick-Reference Guide to the detailed tables indicates major topics of each table.

85

Notices TABLE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

7 Federal Register 7 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 160 / Thursday, August 18, 2011 / Notices TABLE 2-NET BURDEN CHANGE-Continued 2011-2012 2012-2013 Change % Change Burden disposition Total Applicants .................................... 23,611,500 24,705,864 +1,094,364 +4.63 Net decrease in burden. The increase in applicants is offset by the results of the Department's simplification changes. This has created an over- all decrease in burden of 8.94% or 2,881,475 hours. Total Applicant Burden ......................... 32,239,328 29,357,853 ¥2,881,475 ¥8.94 Total Annual Responses ....................... 32,239,328 46,447,024 +14,207,696 +44.07 Cost for All Applicants .......................... $159,370.20 $234,804.24 $75,434.04 +47.33 The Department is proud that efforts to simplify the FAFSA submission

86

Table 4  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of 4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of Household Members by Number of Rooms, 1993 (Dollars) Number of Rooms Number of Household Members All Households One to Three Four Five Six Seven Eight or More RSE Column Factors: 0.5 1.8 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 RSE Row Factors All Households................................... 83 49 63 76 87 104 124 2.34 One..................................................... 55 44 51 54 69 78 87 5.33 Two..................................................... 80 56 63 77 82 96 107 3.38 Three.................................................. 92 60 73 82 95 97 131 4.75 Four.................................................... 106 64 78 93 96 124 134 4.53 Five or More....................................... 112 70 83 98 99 117 150 5.89 Notes: -- To obtain the RSE percentage for any table cell, multiply the

87

Pseudoroots as Descriptors for a Thesaurus Based on Weidtmans Diagnosis Table of Pediatrics  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Weidtmans Diagnosis Table enables to encode medical phrases from pediatrics into the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Due to higher refinement in those sections important for pediatrics it has a w...

Rudolf-Josef Fischer

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

88

DSm Vector Spaces of Refined Labels  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

In this book the authors introduce the notion of DSm vector spaces of refined labels. They also realize the refined labels as a plane and a n-dimensional space. Further, using these refined labels, several algebraic structures are defined. Finally DSm semivector space or refined labels is described. Authors also propose some research problems.

Kandasamy, W B Vasantha

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

89

DSm Vector Spaces of Refined Labels  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

In this book the authors introduce the notion of DSm vector spaces of refined labels. They also realize the refined labels as a plane and a n-dimensional space. Further, using these refined labels, several algebraic structures are defined. Finally DSm semivector space or refined labels is described. Authors also propose some research problems.

W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy; Florentin Smarandache

2011-12-02T23:59:59.000Z

90

1995 Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey > Detailed Tables 1995 Detailed Tables Data from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables: Buildings Characteristics Tables, number of buildings and amount of floorspace for major building characteristics. Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables, energy consumption and expenditures for major energy sources. Energy End-Use Data, total, electricity and natural gas consumption and energy intensities for nine specific end-uses. Summary Table—All Principal Buildings Activities (HTML Format) Background information on detailed tables: Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Statistical Significance of Data

91

Conformal refinement of unstructured quadrilateral meshes  

SciTech Connect

We present a multilevel adaptive refinement technique for unstructured quadrilateral meshes in which the mesh is kept conformal at all times. This means that the refined mesh, like the original, is formed of only quadrilateral elements that intersect strictly along edges or at vertices, i.e., vertices of one quadrilateral element do not lie in an edge of another quadrilateral. Elements are refined using templates based on 1:3 refinement of edges. We demonstrate that by careful design of the refinement and coarsening strategy, we can maintain high quality elements in the refined mesh. We demonstrate the method on a number of examples with dynamically changing refinement regions.

Garmella, Rao [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

92

Table 39. Production Capacity of Operable Petroleum Refineries by State as of January 1, 2003  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

State/Refiner/Location Alkylates Aromatics State/Refiner/Location Alkylates Aromatics Isobutane Lubricants Isomers Isopentane and Isohexane Asphalt and Road Oil Marketable Petroleum Coke Hydrogen (MMcfd) Sulfur (short tons per day) Table 4. Production Capacity of Operable Petroleum Refineries by State as of January 1, 2013 (Barrels per Stream Day, Except Where Noted) Isooctane a

93

Electronic structure of superconductivity refined  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Electronic structure of superconductivity refined Electronic structure of superconductivity refined Electronic structure of superconductivity refined A team of physicists propose a new model that expands on a little understood aspect of the electronic structure in high-temperature superconductors. July 10, 2008 Los Alamos National Laboratory sits on top of a once-remote mesa in northern New Mexico with the Jemez mountains as a backdrop to research and innovation covering multi-disciplines from bioscience, sustainable energy sources, to plasma physics and new materials. Los Alamos National Laboratory sits on top of a once-remote mesa in northern New Mexico with the Jemez mountains as a backdrop to research and innovation covering multi-disciplines from bioscience, sustainable energy sources, to plasma physics and new materials.

94

Carbon Emissions: Petroleum Refining Industry  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Petroleum Refining Industry Petroleum Refining Industry Carbon Emissions in the Petroleum Refining Industry The Industry at a Glance, 1994 (SIC Code: 2911) Total Energy-Related Emissions: 79.9 million metric tons of carbon (MMTC) -- Pct. of All Manufacturers: 21.5% -- Nonfuel Emissions: 16.5 MMTC Total First Use of Energy: 6,263 trillion Btu -- Pct. of All Manufacturers: 28.9% Nonfuel Use of Energy Sources: 3,110 trillion Btu (49.7%) -- Naphthas and Other Oils: 1,328 trillion Btu -- Asphalt and Road Oil: 1,224 trillion Btu -- Lubricants: 416 trillion Btu Carbon Intensity: 12.75 MMTC per quadrillion Btu Energy Information Administration, "1994 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey", "Monthly Refinery Report" for 1994, and Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 1998.

95

Used oil re-refining  

SciTech Connect

Used oils, especially used lubricating oils which are normally considered waste and are discarded or burned, are reclaimed for reuse by a re-refining procedure involving the steps of: heat soaking the used oil; distilling the heat soaked oil; passing the distillate through a guard bed of activated material; hydrotreating the guard bed treated distillate under standard hydrotreating conditions. If the used oil to be re-refined contains a quantity of water and/or fuel fraction which the practioner considers sufficiently large to be detrimental, the used oil may be subjected to a dewatering/defueling step prior to being heat soaked.

Reid, L. E.; Ryan, D. G.; Yao, K. C.

1985-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

96

Green Petroleum Refining - Mathematical Models for Optimizing Petroleum Refining Under Emission Constraints.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

??Petroleum refining processes provide the daily requirements of energy for the global market. Each refining process produces wastes that have the capacity to harm the (more)

Ali Yusuf, Yusuf

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

97

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in excel Errata - August 25, 2004 1 to117 - Complete set of of Supplemental Tables PDF Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) XLS PDF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) XLS PDF Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) XLS PDF Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) XLS PDF Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) XLS PDF Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

98

1999 CBECS Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables 1999 CBECS Detailed Tables Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures Data from the 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in the Building Characteristics tables, which include number of buildings and total floorspace for various Building Characteristics, and Consumption and Expenditures tables, which include energy usage figures for major energy sources. A table of Relative Standard Errors (RSEs) is included as a worksheet tab in each Excel tables. Complete sets of RSE tables are also available in .pdf format. (What is an RSE?) Preliminary End-Use Consumption Estimates for 1999 | Description of 1999 Detailed Tables and Categories of Data

99

A design flow based on modular refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

We propose a practical methodology based on modular refinement to design complex systems. The methodology relies on modules with latency-insensitive interfaces so that the refinements can change the timing contract of a ...

Dave, Nirav H.

100

Sharp Retrenchment, Modulated Refinement and Simulation  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

retrenchment is introduced and briefly justified informally, as a liberalisation of refinement. In sharp as a liberalisation of the notion of refinement, whose purpose was to enable more of the informal aspects of de

Banach, Richard

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

Entitlements exemptions for new refiners  

SciTech Connect

The practice of exempting start-up inventories from entitlement requirements for new refiners has been called into question by the Office of Hearings and Appeals and other responsible Departmental officials. ERA with the assistance of the Office of General Counsel considering resolving the matter through rulemaking; however, by October 26, 1979 no rulemaking had been published. Because of the absence of published standards for use in granting these entitlements to new refineries, undue reliance was placed on individual judgements that could result in inequities to applicants and increase the potential for fraud and abuse. Recommendations are given as follows: (1) if the program for granting entitlements exemptions to new refiners is continued, the Administrator, ERA should promptly take action to adopt an appropriate regulation to formalize the program by establishing standards and controls that will assure consistent and equitable application; in addition, files containing adjustments given to new refiners should be made complete to support benefits already allowed; and (2) whether the program is continued or discontinued, the General Counsel and the Administrator, ERA, should coordiate on how to evaluate the propriety of inventory adjustments previously granted to new refineries.

Not Available

1980-02-29T23:59:59.000Z

102

Reaping Energy Savings from Petroleum Refining  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

REAPING ENERGY SAVINGS FROM PETROLEUM REFINING Alan Deng, Project Manager, San Francisco, CA, Ron Cascone, Project Manager, White Plains, NY, Nexant, Inc. ABSTRACT The refining industry is one of the largest energy users in Pacific Gas.... Market barriers include lack of standards and perceptions of unproven reliability for new technologies in petroleum refining, lack of understanding of the refining process by energy efficiency professionals, lack of capital investment, high up...

Deng, A.; Cascone, R.

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

103

Firing of pulverized solvent refined coal  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An air-purged burner for the firing of pulverized solvent refined coal is constructed and operated such that the solvent refined coal can be fired without the coking thereof on the burner components. The air-purged burner is designed for the firing of pulverized solvent refined coal in a tangentially fired boiler.

Derbidge, T. Craig (Sunnyvale, CA); Mulholland, James A. (Chapel Hill, NC); Foster, Edward P. (Macungie, PA)

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

104

ITP Petroleum Refining: Impacts of Condition Assessment on Energy...  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

ITP Petroleum Refining: Impacts of Condition Assessment on Energy Use: Selected Applications in Chemicals Processing and Petroleum Refining ITP Petroleum Refining: Impacts of...

105

ITP Petroleum Refining: Energy and Environmental Profile of the...  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Petroleum Refining Industry (November 2007) ITP Petroleum Refining: Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Petroleum Refining Industry...

106

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

December 22, 2000 (Next Release: December, 2001) Related Links Annual Energy Outlook 2001 Assumptions to the AEO2001 NEMS Conference Contacts Forecast Homepage EIA Homepage AEO Supplement Reference Case Forecast (1999-2020) (HTML) Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

107

"Table 1. Aeo Reference Case Projection Results" "Variable","Average Absolute Percent Differences","Percent of Projections Over- Estimated"  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Aeo Reference Case Projection Results" Aeo Reference Case Projection Results" "Variable","Average Absolute Percent Differences","Percent of Projections Over- Estimated" "Gross Domestic Product" "Real Gross Domestic Product (Average Cumulative Growth)* (Table 2)",0.9772689079,42.55319149 "Petroleum" "Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil (Constant $) (Table 3a)",35.19047501,18.61702128 "Imported Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil (Nominal $) (Table 3b)",34.68652106,19.68085106 "Total Petroleum Consumption (Table 4)",6.150682783,66.4893617 "Crude Oil Production (Table 5)",5.99969572,59.57446809 "Petroleum Net Imports (Table 6)",13.27260615,67.0212766 "Natural Gas"

108

FY 2005 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 6 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 6 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 6 Science.........................................................................................................

109

Solvent refined coal (SRC) process  

SciTech Connect

This report summarizes the progress of the Solvent Refined Coal (SRC) project by The Pittsburg and Midway Coal Mining Co. at the SRC Pilot Plant in Fort Lewis, Washington and the Gulf Science and Technology Company Process Development Unit (P-99) in Harmarville, Pennsylvania, for the Department of Energy during the month of October, 1980. The Fort Lewis Pilot Plant was shut down the entire month of October, 1980 for inspection and maintenance. PDU P-99 completed two runs during October investigating potential start-up modes for the Demonstration Plant.

Not Available

1980-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

110

Petroleum Refining Energy Use in Relation to Fuel Products Made  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

In recent years crude oils available to refiners have required more energy to refine and refiners have adjusted their processes to obtain better energy efficiency. In addition, the shift to lead-free gasoline has led to refining adjustments...

White, J. R.; Marshall, J. F.; Shoemaker, G. L.; Smith, R. B.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

111

Chapter 2 Conventional refining processes  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses conventional refining processes. Refining is a very elaborate operation by which crude oil is transformed into a series of products such as, gases, fuels, solvents, lube oils, etc. Crude oil is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons (HC) of different C/H ratio and molecular structures. The different classes of HC molecules comprise paraffins, olefins, cycles, aromatics, resins, asphaltenes, and other poly-unsaturated molecules. In addition to hydrocarbons, crude oils also contain some other compounds composed by other atoms (heteroatoms) than carbon and hydrogen. Those moieties consist of sulfur (S), nitrogen (N), oxygen (O), and heavy metals. Crudes are usually classified in terms of their specific gravity as very light, light, median, heavy, and extra heavy. An empirical set of units for the crude gravity, defined by the American Petroleum Institute (API), is currently used in oil industry. Their appearance varies from transparent liquids to black solids, going from light to heavy. Light oils have lower specific gravity and larger API gravity, while for heavy oils vice versa. Their composition also changes, and so the concentration of those heteroatomic compounds typically increases from light to heavy. The crude oils are also categorized in terms of their chemical composition, as for instance, sour crude oils, those presenting high acidity, paraffinic, naphthenic, and aromatic.

2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

112

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2002 (AEO2002) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2002, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2002 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seven tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2002 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2000-2002 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current

113

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Homepage Homepage Supplement Tables to the AEO2001 The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2001 (AEO2001) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2001, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2001 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2001 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1999 and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

114

Representations of finite groups The Alperin-McKay refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Representations of finite groups The Alperin-McKay refinement The Isaacs-Navarro refinements The Mc-McKay refinement The Isaacs-Navarro refinements The basics Some history The McKay conjecture (for now) Let G groups The Alperin-McKay refinement The Isaacs-Navarro refinements The basics Some history The Mc

Cossey, James P.

115

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO200 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1998, and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, Fourth Quarter 1999 or Short Term Energy Outlook, First Quarter 2000, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

116

Refining Bio-Oil alongside Petroleum  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

W.R. Grace and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory are working to establish a bio-oil refining process that users existing petroleum refinery infrastructure.

117

FY 2005 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Congressional Budget Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropria ted as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress.

118

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 EIA Glossary Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Release date: February 2005 Next release date: February 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO2005) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2025. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2005, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2005 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2005 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2003-2005 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

119

Heavy oils (natural and refined)  

SciTech Connect

This section of the Petroleum and Coal review again contains discussions on the analysis of asphalts, bitumens, tars, and pitches as well as heavy natural and refined oils. The characterization of these heavy (high-boiling) materials impacts the way they are produced, their effect on the processing environment, and their suitability for various end products. The analysis of these heavy materials is becoming increasingly important as crude oil stocks get heavier and larger quantities of high-boiling materials are processed to derive clean lower boiling products. This review covers articles found in the literature in the last two years. This review will cover new or improved analytical procedures and applications to new sources of heavy oils. This review will be subdivided into individual separation or analytical techniques. Combined analytical techniques (e.g., GC-FT-IR) will be included under the technique most emphasized in the article. The review is categorized further by chromatographic techniques, spectroscopic techniques, thermal techniques, and miscellaneous. 71 refs.

Lintelmann, K.A. [Marathon Oil Co., Littleton, CO (United States)

1995-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

120

Louisiana Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Louisiana Block Grant Tables Louisiana Block Grant Tables This table details funding for state, city, and county governments in the state of Louisiana. Louisiana Block Grant Tables...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

Mississippi Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Mississippi Block Grant Tables Mississippi Block Grant Tables A table describing where state funding is being distributed Mississippi Block Grant Tables More Documents &...

122

2003 CBECS RSE Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" type=text/css rel=stylesheet> Home > Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > 2003 Detailed Tables > RSE Tables 2003 CBECS Relative Standard Error (RSE) Tables Released: Dec 2006 Next CBECS will be conducted in 2007 Standard error is a measure of the reliability or precision of the survey statistic. The value for the standard error can be used to construct confidence intervals and to perform hypothesis tests by standard statistical methods. Relative Standard Error (RSE) is defined as the standard error (square root of the variance) of a survey estimate, divided by the survey estimate and multiplied by 100. (More information on RSEs)

123

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Buildings Use Tables Buildings Use Tables (24 pages, 129 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 12. Employment Size Category, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 13. Employment Size Category, Floorspace, 1995 Table 14. Weekly Operating Hours, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 15. Weekly Operating Hours, Floorspace, 1995 Table 16. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 17. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the

124

Re-refining enters a new era  

SciTech Connect

The author describes the current state of affairs in the re-refining industry. Re-refiners are companies that recycle used lubricating oil into high quality base oils and other petroleum products. The re-refining industry has experienced it's own unique problems, as well as some of those occurring in the rest of the petroleum industry. For these reasons, other solutions are forthcoming, resulting in a new era. The future will see existing plants retrofitted, shut down plants being reopened, expanded and modernized and in the long term, new grass roots ''mega'' plants will be constructed in strategic marketing territories.

Booth, G.T. III

1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

125

Firing of pulverized solvent refined coal  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A burner for the firing of pulverized solvent refined coal is constructed and operated such that the solvent refined coal can be fired successfully without any performance limitations and without the coking of the solvent refined coal on the burner components. The burner is provided with a tangential inlet of primary air and pulverized fuel, a vaned diffusion swirler for the mixture of primary air and fuel, a center water-cooled conical diffuser shielding the incoming fuel from the heat radiation from the flame and deflecting the primary air and fuel steam into the secondary air, and a watercooled annulus located between the primary air and secondary air flows.

Lennon, Dennis R. (Allentown, PA); Snedden, Richard B. (McKeesport, PA); Foster, Edward P. (Macungie, PA); Bellas, George T. (Library, PA)

1990-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

126

Changing structure of the world refining industry: implications for the United States and other major consuming regions  

SciTech Connect

There are five chapters in this publication. Chapter I on refining industry in transition covers refining history highlights, and OPEC's downstream operations. Chapter II on demand for oil and oil products discusses supply and demand for OPEC oil, demand for oil products, historical growth trends, future growth trends and the case of East Asia - emergence of a fuel oil glut. Chapter III on the US and other traditional refining centers begins with an introduction on the structure of refining and continues on to cover the refining industry in OECD countries, USA, Western Europe, Japan, Singapore and Caribbean and closes with some conclusions. Chapter IV is on refining expansions in OPEC and the third World Nations. The following are covered: (1) nations of the Gulf (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, United Arab Emirates); (2) OPEC members beyond the Gulf (Indonesia, Africa, Libya, Algeria, Nigeria and Gabon, South America, Venezuela); (3) other major exporters (China, Egypt, Malaysia, Mexico); (4) non-OPEC developing countries - trends in the refining sector. The chapter ends with a short summary on capacity prospects and comparative economics. The final chapter has conclusions and recommendations on: price interactions between crude and products; product exports - impact on OPEC's internal; prices and market influence; importers and exporters - decisions; and course of action of the United States. 18 figures, 40 tables.

Not Available

1985-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

127

ARM - Instrument Location Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

govInstrumentsLocation Table govInstrumentsLocation Table Instruments Location Table Contacts Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument Locations Site abbreviations explained in the key. Instrument Name Abbreviation NSA SGP TWP AMF C1 C2 EF BF CF EF IF C1 C2 C3 EF IF Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor ACSM Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer AERI Aethalometer AETH Ameriflux Measurement Component AMC Aerosol Observing System AOS Meteorological Measurements associated with the Aerosol Observing System AOSMET Broadband Radiometer Station BRS

129

Introducing Reference Semantics via Refinement Graeme Smith  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Introducing Reference Semantics via Refinement Graeme Smith Software Verification Research Centre, University of Queensland, Australia smith@svrc.uq.edu.au Abstract. Two types of semantics have been given

Smith, Graeme

130

FY 2009 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2009 Congressional Budget 1/30/2008 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 9:01:45AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Request State Table 1 1 $27,588

131

FY 2005 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Office of Management, Budget Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Preliminary Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number

132

FY 2010 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2010 Congressional Budget 5/4/2009 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 2:13:22PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request State Table 1 1 $46,946 $48,781 $38,844 Alabama 2 $6,569

133

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook 1999 Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Contacts bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage supplemental.gif (7420 bytes) (Errata as of 9/13/99) The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1997 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO99, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO99 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables are presented.

134

FY 2006 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 State Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2006 Congressional Budget 1/27/2005 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 3:32:58PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp FY 2006 Request State Table

135

FY 2010 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2010 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 2:08:56PM Department Of Energy 5/4/2009 Page Number FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request Laboratory Table 1 1 $1,200

136

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOEIG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ......

137

FY 2008 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Table State Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2008 Congressional Budget 2/1/2007 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:53:08AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request State Table 1 1 $28,332 $30,341

138

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Gallons per Day Motor Gasoline No. 2 Distillate Residual Fuel Oil 5. U.S. Refiner Wholesale Petroleum Product Volumes Figure Percentages of Refiner Wholesale Volumes 1997...

139

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Gallons per Day Motor Gasoline No. 2 Distillate Residual Fuel Oil 5. U.S. Refiner Wholesale Petroleum Product Volumes Figure Percentages of Refiner Wholesale Volumes 1996...

140

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Gallons per Day Motor Gasoline No. 2 Distillate Residual Fuel Oil 5. U.S. Refiner Wholesale Petroleum Product Volumes Figure Percentages of Refiner Wholesale Volumes 1995...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

Diameter-Refined Metallic Carbon Nanotubes as Optically Tunable...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Diameter-Refined Metallic Carbon Nanotubes as Optically Tunable Transparent Conductors Home > Research > ANSER Research Highlights > Diameter-Refined Metallic Carbon Nanotubes as...

142

Genealogy of major U.S. refiners  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

of major U.S. refiners of major U.S. refiners 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Amoco SOHIO BP ARCO Mapco Williams Clark Refining 1/89 12/98 4/00 3/98 Orion Diamond Shamrock Ultramar k 12/96 7/03 Ultramar Diamond Shamrock (UDS) Total North America UDS 9/97 Valero Salomon (Basis) Valero Williams BP BP b BP-Husky Refining LLC (jv) Husky Huntway 5/97 6/01 9/05 Valero Premcor g Valero Valero Valero 12/01 7/94 e 12/98 f Carlyle Group y Coastal 3/03 d 12/88 a 6/01 o Sun Company Sunoco v 7/07 i 4/08 c 5/04 h Pacific Refining (jv) 12/88 r El Paso 1/04 w 10/98 m 6/00 n 9/89 t 8/94 u See notes, footnotes, and source notes below. PBF Energy 6/10 p 12/10 q 3/11 x 10/11 j 9/00 l 1/01 s Genealogy of major U.S. refiners (continued) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

143

Refining intensity, energy consumption, and pulp quality in two-stage chip refining  

SciTech Connect

This paper reports on thermomechanical pulps produced in two pilot plant installations. Both installations were conventional two-stage systems in which the first stage was pressurized and the second was atmospheric. At a given specific energy, pulp quality was improved. Alternatively, for a given pulp quality, the energy consumption was reduced when refining in the first stage was carried out at a high refining intensity. High refining intensity was reached by operating the first stage either at a high rotational speed or low consistency. There were indications that these benefits could be enhanced if the second stage were operated at a low refining intensity.

Miles, K.B.; May, W.D.; Karnis, A. (Pulp and Paper Research Inst. of Canada, 570 St. John's Boulevard, Pointe Claire, Quebec H9R 3J9 (CA))

1991-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Green Petroleum Refining -Mathematical Models for Optimizing Petroleum Refining Under Emission Constraints  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Green Petroleum Refining - Mathematical Models for Optimizing Petroleum Refining Under Emission understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. #12;iii Abstract Petroleum and treating options for petroleum refinery waste streams. The performance of the developed model

Anderson, Charles H.

145

Description of 2003 CBECS Detailed Tables and Categories of Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

floorspace heated, cooled, and lit, and energy-using equipment types (heating, cooling, water heating, lighting, and refrigeration). Tables C1-C12 and C1A-C12A contain energy usage...

146

FY 2011 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 State Index Page Number FY 2011 Congressional Budget 1/29/2010 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:34:40AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2009 Appropriation

147

FY 2007 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory tables Laboratory tables preliminary Department of Energy FY 2007 Congressional Budget Request February 2006 Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory tables preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2007 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 12:10:40PM Department Of Energy 1/31/2006 Page Number FY 2005 Appropriation FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007

148

FY 2011 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2011 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:24:57AM Department Of Energy 1/29/2010 Page

149

FY 2008 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Table Laboratory Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2008 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:51:02AM Department Of Energy 2/1/2007 Page Number FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request

150

FY 2006 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2006 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 3:43:16PM Department Of Energy 1/27/2005 Page Number FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp

151

Fy 2009 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2009 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 8:59:25AM Department Of Energy 1/30/2008 Page Number FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009

152

Hydrogen Piping Experience in Chevron Refining  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Piping Piping Experience in Chevron Refining Ned Niccolls Materials Engineer Chevron Energy Technology Company Hydrogen Pipeline Working Group Workshop August 30-31, 2005 Outline 2 Overall perspectives from long term use of hydrogen piping in refining. Piping specifications and practices. The (few) problem areas. Related industry work: American Petroleum Institute corrosion and materials work on high temperature hydrogen attack. Overall Perspectives 3 Few problems with hydrogen piping operating at ambient to at least 800F and pressures up to at least 3000psia as long as we stay within well- defined limits H2S contamination presents many more problems, beyond the scope of this talk We will note a couple of specific vulnerabilities Refining tracks materials performance in

153

Hydrotreating operations discussed at refining meeting  

SciTech Connect

At the most recent National Petroleum Refiners Association question and answer session on refining and petrochemical technology, refiners and a panel of experts exchanged experiences on hydrotreater operations. Topics addressed included reactor pressurization, scale basket removal, and the use of antifoulants in effluent exchangers. This article presents comments from the panelists on the following questions. (1) What is the industry practice used to speed up the pressurization of 2.25 Cr/1 Mo reactors during start-up? Is there any relationship between reactor skin temperature and pressure used? (2) Has anyone removed scale baskets from a hydrotreating reactor and compared operations before and after? If so, were there any noticeable differences? Why? (3) What is the industry experience with the use of antifoulants for hydrocracking or hydrotreating reactor effluent exchangers?

NONE

1995-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

154

Norwegian Silicon Refining AS | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Refining AS Refining AS Jump to: navigation, search Name Norwegian Silicon Refining AS Place Oslo, Norway Zip 214 Product Oslo-based company with an upgraded metallurgical silicon (UMG) production process called the Stubergh method. Coordinates 59.91228°, 10.74998° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":59.91228,"lon":10.74998,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

155

1995 Reformulated Gasoline Market Affected Refiners Differently  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 Reformulated Gasoline Market Affected 5 Reformulated Gasoline Market Affected Refiners Differently by John Zyren, Charles Dale and Charles Riner Introduction The United States has completed its first summer driving season using reformulated gasoline (RFG). Motorists noticed price increases at the retail level, resulting from the increased cost to produce and deliver the product, as well as from the tight sup- ply/demand balance during the summer. This arti- cle focuses on the costs of producing RFG as experienced by different types of refiners and on how these refiners fared this past summer, given the prices for RFG at the refinery gate. RFG Regulatory Requirements The use of RFG is a result of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). The CAAA cover a wide range of programs aimed at improving air qual-

156

FY 2013 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Current Enacted Congressional Approp. Approp. * Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy........................................ 1,771,721 1,809,638 2,337,000 +527,362 +29.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability......................................... 138,170 139,103 143,015 +3,912 +2.8% Nuclear energy................................................................................ 717,817 765,391 770,445 +5,054 +0.7% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................................. -16,500 -- --

157

FY 2009 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Current Current Congressional Op. Plan Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy.......................... -- 1,722,407 1,255,393 -467,014 -27.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................... -- 138,556 134,000 -4,556 -3.3% Nuclear energy................................................................. -- 961,665 853,644 -108,021 -11.2% Legacy management........................................................ -- 33,872 -- -33,872 -100.0% Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance..........................................

158

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents 4. Building HVAC Requirements ....................................................................................1 4.1.2 What's New for the 2013 Standards.............................................................................................3 4.1.4 California Appliance Standards and Equipment Certification

159

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Tables  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Table Updated: October 6, 2014 FY 2016 September 2014 CRC Calculation Table (pdf) Final FY 2015 CRC Letter & Table (pdf) Note: The Cost...

160

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

/2011 /2011 Decades of Discovery Decades of Discovery Page 2 6/1/2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 6 2 BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES .................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Adenosine Triphosphate: The Energy Currency of Life .............................................. 7 2.2 Making Better Catalysts .............................................................................................. 8 2.3 Understanding Chemical Reactions............................................................................ 9 2.4 New Types of Superconductors ................................................................................ 10

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

Design refinements and support systems for Texas A&M Automatic Marine Corer  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

to thank his wife, Tommie, for her patience and moral support during the project. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapters I. INTRODUCTION, Page II. DESIGN REFINEMENTS AND TESTING. III. WINCE AND A-FRAME ASSEMBLY AND SUPPORT VESSEL . . 23 IV. LUBRICATION... for testing and demonstration purposes . The parts required for one assembly are shown in Fig. 3. At the time of ordering the material, only 3. 75 in. diameter solid round stock was available. The cutting away of excess stock to produce a 3 in. diameter...

Henderson, Herman Olen

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

162

Refinement of the crystal structure of hydroboracite  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...1978) ABSTRACT The crystal structure of caysichite was determined and refined to R=0.06, using 959 independentreflec-iions; the space group is CcmZy with a 13,27(L), b 13.91(1),c 9.73G)4,. The crystal chemical formula is Ye(CagREJ...

C. Sabelli; A. Stoppioni

163

Focus on Venezuelan heavy crude: refining margins  

SciTech Connect

Of six crudes refined in the US Gulf Coast, heavy Venezuelan crude Lagunillas (15/sup 0/ API) provides the best margin per barrel. Data for end of December 1983 and the first three weeks of January show that margins on all crudes are on the rise in this market, due to a turnaround in product prices. The lighter crudes are showing the greatest increase in Gross Product Worth. This is having a modest shrinking effect on the margin differential between light and heavy crudes in this market. The domestic crude West Texas Intermediate, at 40/sup 0/ API, provides the highest GPW in this crude slate sample, over US $31 per barrel, compared to GPW of under US $28 per barrel for Lagunillas. Still, as Lagunillas cost about US $8 less than does WTI, refiners with sufficient residue conversion capacity can be earning about US $3.50 more in margin per barrel than they can with WTI. Although few refiners would be using a 15/sup 0/ API crude exclusively for any length of time, heavier oil's inclusion in modern refiners' diets is enhancing their competitive position more than any other single factor. This issue of Energy Detente presents the fuel price/tax series and industrial fuel prices for January 1984 for countries of the Western Hemisphere.

Not Available

1984-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

164

Transforming and Refining Abstract Constraint Specifications  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Transforming and Refining Abstract Constraint Specifications Alan M. Frisch1 , Brahim Hnich2 , Ian choose model transformations to reduce greatly the amount of effort that is required to solve a problem by systematic search. It is a consid- erable challenge to automate such transformations. A problem may be viewed

Walsh, Toby

165

TABLE OF CONTENTS section page  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

and effect lasting transformation in the market for energy efficiency across the economy. Accordingly With broad stakeholder input, the CPUC has continually refined the implementation strategies which

166

Table 8. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 January ....................... 68.4 67.8 61.8 54.9 51.4 55.0 77.5 76.9 68.0 59.1 - 61.2 February ..................... 68.5 67.9 63.4 56.2 52.1 56.4 77.9 77.3 69.7 60.2 - 62.9 March .......................... 74.7 74.1 69.1 63.5 57.8 63.5 83.7 83.2 75.4 67.3 W 69.7 April ............................ 82.9 82.2 77.5 71.5 64.0 70.8 92.0 91.4 83.8 75.7 - 77.9 May ............................. 86.2 85.7 82.1 71.8 65.3 71.9 95.5 95.0 87.7 75.8 - 78.8 June ............................ 83.6 83.0 79.0 66.6 60.0 66.6 92.6 92.0 84.8 69.3 - 73.2 July ............................. 81.2 80.7 76.4 66.6 60.1 66.5 90.3 89.8 82.3 70.1 - 73.1 August ........................ 79.3 78.8 74.3 66.1 60.0 66.1 88.4 87.9 80.6 69.6 W 72.2 September .................. 79.9 79.4 74.7 67.1 60.9 67.1 88.7 88.2 81.0 70.7 - 73.3 October .......................

167

Table 7. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1997 January ....................... 35.6 37.6 45.0 122.6 33.7 201.3 8.8 9.1 12.1 15.0 W 27.1 February ..................... 37.8 39.9 46.7 127.7 38.1 212.6 9.1 9.4 12.4 15.5 W 27.9 March .......................... 38.4 40.5 47.0 129.9 35.1 212.0 9.3 9.6 12.3 15.5 NA 27.9 April ............................ 38.5 40.7 47.7 134.5 33.9 216.1 9.3 9.6 12.2 16.1 W 28.3 May ............................. 38.1 39.8 45.9 135.5 34.2 215.7 9.2 9.5 12.2 16.3 W 28.5 June ............................ 39.3 41.0 46.1 138.7 29.1 214.0 9.5 9.8 12.3 16.7 W 29.0 July ............................. 43.2 44.9 45.7 148.0 31.9 225.6 10.4 10.7 12.3 18.0 W 30.3 August ........................ 43.4 45.1 46.3 144.9 33.2 224.5 10.3 10.5 12.2 17.2 W 29.5 September .................. 42.8 44.5 45.2 137.6 33.1 215.9 10.0 10.2 11.6 16.2 W 27.9 October .......................

168

Table 13. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 January ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - February ..................... - - - - - - - - - - - - March .......................... - - - - - - - - - - - - April ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - May ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - June ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - July ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - August ........................ - - - - - - - - - - - - September .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - October ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - November ................... - - - - - - - - - - - - December ................... - - - - - - - - - - - - 1993 ............................... - - - - - - - - - - - -

169

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

(Million Gallons per Day) Year Month Regular Midgrade Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total 1994 ................................ 29.7 31.2 36.1 113.5 22.8 172.4 7.6 7.8 10.1 14.6 0.1 24.8 1995 January ....................... 18.5 19.6 13.2 88.3 22.4 123.8 4.9 5.1 3.8 W W 15.1 February ..................... 21.7 23.1 18.6 98.4 23.3 140.2 5.7 5.9 5.2 W W 18.0 March .......................... 23.5 24.8 21.2 103.4 25.1 149.7 6.2 6.5 5.4 W W 19.0 April ............................ 25.9 27.2 22.5 103.9 23.8 150.3 6.4 6.6 5.6 W W 19.1 May ............................. 27.0 28.3 23.1 111.4 25.0 159.5 6.4 6.6 5.8 W W 20.0 June ............................ 28.0 29.3 23.6 116.2 29.3 169.0 6.6 6.8 5.9 W W 20.6

170

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1,312.3 1,312.3 32,821.9 41,410.1 112,727.4 28,125.2 182,262.7 8,740.5 9,015.4 W 15,226.6 W 27,455.8 February ............................. 33,062.4 34,813.3 43,506.0 120,110.9 28,668.6 192,285.5 9,196.3 9,492.7 W 16,071.5 W 29,126.3 March .................................. 32,634.8 34,295.4 43,645.3 122,321.7 30,937.8 196,904.8 9,385.0 9,689.1 W 16,559.0 W 29,420.1 April .................................... 34,010.4 35,657.9 43,864.5 121,891.1 27,743.2 193,498.9 9,410.9 9,694.5 W 16,548.6 W 29,584.3 May ..................................... 35,529.2 37,016.8 45,031.4 130,346.8 30,182.4 205,560.7 9,402.8 9,689.9 W 17,374.5 W 30,806.5 June .................................... 36,890.5 38,450.5 46,008.3 135,930.8

171

Table 45. Refiner Volumes of Aviation Fuels, Kerosene, No. 1 Distillate,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

34.7 34.7 428.4 46,539.7 12,728.4 790.3 6,200.2 648.4 4,283.7 3,323.4 44,204.9 February ......................... 151.1 456.7 46,811.8 13,168.9 661.0 5,865.0 639.0 3,498.4 4,030.8 40,811.0 March .............................. 155.1 534.1 47,764.0 11,796.0 685.4 3,081.1 347.2 1,274.9 2,912.8 32,094.6 April ................................ 181.4 632.9 48,092.4 12,418.7 309.0 1,382.4 162.4 425.7 2,671.8 27,292.6 May ................................. 194.0 730.2 48,978.1 11,174.4 288.0 868.9 122.3 240.3 2,628.8 22,213.6 June ................................ 184.4 739.6 50,091.3 10,034.5 424.7 571.0 151.7 314.2 2,237.4 23,117.3 July ................................. 205.9 830.4 50,287.4 11,139.2 226.4 714.5 145.1 261.5 2,057.6 25,037.3 August ............................ 200.2 854.8 50,327.4 11,706.4 202.7 1,112.1

172

Table A2. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane, and Kerosene,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

PAD District I 1983 ...................................... 127.8 123.0 87.0 87.8 91.3 52.8 94.5 90.1 1984 ...................................... 124.7 119.5 83.5 85.0 93.3 50.9 106.0 92.2 1985 ...................................... 121.4 115.3 78.5 82.2 91.5 44.9 104.9 88.1 1986 ...................................... 100.6 91.8 52.8 52.2 86.0 32.7 81.0 61.6 1987 ...................................... 90.9 85.0 54.1 55.6 82.3 31.0 78.1 58.9 1988 ...................................... 89.5 82.9 51.2 51.3 84.8 29.8 73.3 55.3 1989 ...................................... 99.2 92.2 59.1 60.1 75.8 29.2 69.3 67.2 1990 ...................................... 112.3 105.3 75.9 78.3 91.8 45.0 86.4 84.4 1991 ...................................... 105.6 100.3 65.3 67.2 W 40.5 81.0 74.0 1992 ......................................

173

Table 13. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1995 January ....................... 7.1 7.4 19.6 W W 40.7 2.8 2.8 7.0 2.8 - 9.8 February ..................... 7.5 7.8 20.5 17.3 5.1 42.9 2.9 3.0 7.4 2.9 - 10.3 March .......................... 7.5 7.8 20.5 17.1 5.8 43.4 3.0 3.1 7.2 3.0 - 10.2 April ............................ 7.7 8.0 20.6 16.9 3.9 41.3 3.0 3.0 7.3 3.0 - 10.3 May ............................. 8.0 8.2 21.2 17.8 5.2 44.1 3.0 3.0 7.5 3.1 - 10.6 June ............................ 8.4 8.6 21.6 18.5 4.8 44.9 3.2 3.2 7.8 3.3 - 11.0 July ............................. 8.1 8.3 20.8 17.6 5.5 44.0 3.0 3.0 7.6 3.2 - 10.8 August ........................ 8.2 8.5 21.0 18.0 6.6 45.7 3.1 3.1 7.6 3.3 - 10.9 September .................. 8.0 8.3 20.4 W W 43.0 3.2 3.2 7.4 3.0 - 10.5 October ....................... 7.7 8.0 20.5 W W 42.8 3.0 3.0 W W - 10.5 November ...................

174

Table 45. Refiner Volumes of Aviation Fuels, Kerosene, No. 1 Distillate,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4.2 4.2 406.0 45,968.1 11,079.0 534.5 5,366.3 833.9 4,675.6 3,248.9 44,872.7 February ......................... 146.6 499.8 47,800.3 10,256.4 357.8 3,591.8 621.7 2,731.9 3,684.2 38,357.8 March .............................. 150.3 518.6 48,152.6 10,316.6 365.5 2,056.1 336.2 1,114.2 3,284.7 28,091.6 April ................................ 171.8 592.8 49,135.3 9,493.8 287.9 1,335.2 199.7 438.4 3,352.9 25,786.2 May ................................. 172.2 665.1 49,770.4 9,886.7 249.2 1,017.4 176.2 314.9 2,935.6 24,783.5 June ................................ 175.3 759.4 52,048.3 10,834.1 192.7 754.0 194.4 360.2 2,313.9 24,285.6 July ................................. 239.2 853.3 51,725.7 10,840.4 136.7 1,348.8 199.7 362.4 2,083.2 26,581.1 August ............................ 201.6 810.9 52,026.8 12,609.7 241.1 1,226.9

175

Table 13. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 1996 ................................ 10.7 11.1 26.1 20.5 8.0 54.6 3.3 3.4 7.9 3.3 W 11.3 1997 January ....................... 11.3 11.8 27.2 19.8 7.3 54.3 3.2 3.3 7.9 3.0 W 10.8 February ..................... 12.1 12.6 28.3 20.7 6.9 55.9 3.3 3.4 8.1 3.0 W 11.1 March .......................... 12.4 12.9 28.4 21.2 7.4 57.0 3.4 3.5 8.0 3.1 W 11.1 April ............................ 12.4 12.8 29.0 21.1 7.0 57.1 3.4 3.5 7.9 3.0 W 11.0 May ............................. 12.0 12.4 27.3 21.1 7.9 56.3 3.3 3.4 7.9 3.1 W 11.1 June ............................ 12.2 12.6 27.4 21.5 7.0 56.0 3.4 3.5 7.9 3.2 W 11.1 July ............................. 14.0 14.4 27.5 22.7 6.8 57.0 3.8 3.9 8.0 3.4 W 11.5 August ........................ 14.8 15.1 28.1 23.2 8.5 59.8 3.9 4.0 8.0 3.4 W 11.5 September .................. 14.7 15.1 27.7 22.0 7.3 57.0 3.7 3.8

176

Table 8. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

January ....................... 59.4 58.8 54.2 46.0 41.8 46.6 69.8 69.2 60.4 49.8 NA 53.6 February ..................... 61.7 61.1 57.0 49.2 45.0 50.0 71.5 70.9 62.9 53.3 NA 56.9 March .......................... 62.2 61.7 57.4 49.9 46.2 51.3 72.0 71.4 63.3 54.0 NA 58.0 April ............................ 64.9 64.5 60.1 53.5 49.3 54.5 74.6 74.1 66.0 57.6 NA 61.2 May ............................. 66.6 66.2 62.0 54.7 50.3 56.0 76.4 75.9 67.7 58.4 NA 62.6 June ............................ 69.7 69.2 65.3 58.2 53.1 59.3 79.5 78.9 71.2 61.8 NA 65.9 July ............................. 72.6 72.2 68.0 61.0 56.0 62.2 82.3 81.8 73.8 63.9 NA 68.3 August ........................ 77.4 76.9 71.2 63.6 57.9 64.7 86.9 86.3 77.0 66.4 NA 71.0 September .................. 75.5 74.8 68.6 54.6 51.6 57.4 85.2 84.4 74.7 57.1 NA 64.6 October .......................

177

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8,415.8 8,415.8 39,569.3 40,215.9 122,708.5 26,876.5 189,800.8 10,466.7 10,604.8 10,129.5 14,302.8 - 24,432.4 February ............................. 40,637.5 41,953.1 43,328.9 133,687.6 29,805.9 206,822.4 10,360.0 10,513.3 W 15,544.3 W 26,397.7 March .................................. 41,477.4 43,016.1 45,427.5 141,434.5 35,293.6 222,155.7 10,324.1 10,491.1 W 16,370.9 W 27,381.7 April .................................... 43,183.2 44,648.5 46,529.4 145,575.1 45,194.6 237,299.2 9,958.2 10,130.7 10,397.0 15,931.2 W 26,339.9 May ..................................... 42,591.4 44,151.1 46,198.6 146,358.6 40,692.6 233,249.8 10,265.8 10,423.0 W 16,051.1 W 26,538.5 June .................................... 43,545.0 44,890.8 46,463.3

178

Table A1. Refiner/Reseller Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, PAD District  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

PAD District I 1984 ...................................... 92.3 84.8 NA NA 102.5 92.4 91.6 84.2 1985 ...................................... 93.6 85.2 NA NA 104.2 93.3 93.4 85.2 1986 ...................................... 63.9 53.2 NA NA 76.1 62.1 65.3 55.2 1987 ...................................... 67.5 57.7 NA NA 80.5 68.2 69.9 60.6 1988 ...................................... 67.1 56.1 NA NA 81.3 68.7 70.8 60.2 1989 ...................................... 74.1 62.7 82.0 70.0 90.5 76.7 79.4 67.9 1990 ...................................... 87.6 77.7 94.8 83.2 101.9 89.0 91.8 81.5 1991 ...................................... 79.2 70.6 87.5 75.7 95.9 83.2 83.8 74.2 1992 ...................................... 74.0 65.1 84.1 71.4 93.0 78.4 79.6 69.3 1993 ...................................... 69.7 59.0 80.2 66.1

179

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

January ....................... 22.2 23.4 20.4 96.1 20.6 137.2 6.3 6.5 6.5 11.7 0.1 18.3 February ..................... 24.6 26.0 25.6 104.0 19.9 149.6 6.9 7.1 7.9 W W 21.2 March .......................... 31.6 33.2 42.2 113.4 20.6 176.2 7.9 8.2 11.6 W W 26.8 April ............................ 32.9 34.5 43.5 117.7 23.8 185.0 8.1 8.4 11.7 W W 27.0 May ............................. 34.2 35.8 47.6 119.7 24.3 191.6 8.5 8.8 W W 0.1 28.9 June ............................ 35.3 37.1 W W 24.5 197.4 W W W W 0.3 W July ............................. 34.7 36.2 W 122.7 W 191.9 W W W W 0.2 W August ........................ 35.6 37.2 48.6 W W 200.6 W 8.9 13.0 16.6 0.2 29.8 September .................. 34.1 35.6 44.7 123.2 25.0 193.0 8.2 8.5 12.0 W W 27.8 October ....................... 26.7 28.1 27.4 110.9 22.9 161.2 7.2 7.5

180

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

83.0 83.0 73.6 72.4 92.4 79.2 79.1 101.0 83.3 84.5 87.2 75.5 75.0 February ............................. 82.4 72.4 70.4 91.9 78.9 77.5 100.2 84.0 82.6 86.5 74.5 73.0 March .................................. 80.4 70.4 68.7 90.1 78.5 76.0 98.3 82.1 80.6 84.6 72.6 71.4 April .................................... 80.3 68.7 67.7 89.9 79.3 75.4 97.9 NA 79.7 84.4 73.2 70.4 May ..................................... 81.0 69.7 68.6 90.2 77.1 75.7 97.9 86.5 80.5 85.0 73.8 71.3 June .................................... 79.7 67.3 65.6 89.1 73.6 73.0 96.8 82.4 77.5 83.8 70.8 68.4 July ..................................... 77.9 65.4 64.8 87.3 71.4 71.9 95.5 81.2 77.0 82.0 69.2 67.5 August ................................ 83.2 72.1 72.2 92.7 77.9 79.5 100.8 89.6 84.5 87.2 75.8 75.0 September .......................... 83.6 70.7 69.5 93.2 80.4 77.9

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

70.5 70.5 58.3 57.7 79.6 61.2 65.4 88.3 67.0 70.1 75.4 60.0 61.0 February ............................. 70.5 58.1 58.4 79.8 61.0 66.1 88.4 66.8 70.6 75.5 59.8 61.6 March .................................. 75.8 64.1 64.9 84.7 67.6 72.0 93.3 72.7 76.9 80.4 65.8 67.9 April .................................... 84.5 72.6 73.2 93.7 76.8 81.3 102.1 81.8 85.8 88.8 74.3 76.1 May ..................................... 89.3 77.4 75.2 99.1 81.0 84.2 106.6 85.6 87.9 93.3 79.0 78.0 June .................................... 86.9 71.5 70.0 96.5 73.6 79.4 103.9 79.2 83.0 91.0 72.8 73.0 July ..................................... 83.9 72.9 69.4 93.4 79.5 78.1 101.1 83.1 82.1 88.0 75.2 72.3 August ................................ 81.2 71.1 68.3 90.6 77.4 76.1 98.3 81.4 80.3 85.4 73.4 71.1 September .......................... 80.8 71.0 68.8 89.8 76.4

182

Table 8. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1995 January ....................... 65.7 65.0 59.5 52.3 48.2 52.4 75.7 74.9 66.3 56.8 W 59.2 February ..................... 65.7 65.1 60.6 53.4 49.6 53.7 75.4 74.7 67.4 57.9 W 60.6 March .......................... 66.8 66.2 61.0 54.3 50.7 54.6 76.1 75.4 67.4 58.1 W 60.7 April ............................ 72.2 71.7 66.3 62.2 57.0 62.0 81.2 80.7 72.8 66.6 W 68.4 May ............................. 78.8 78.3 72.5 67.6 62.1 67.4 88.0 87.4 79.2 72.4 W 74.3 June ............................ 79.2 78.6 72.5 62.3 58.5 63.1 88.3 87.6 79.5 66.7 W 70.3 July ............................. 74.9 74.2 68.4 56.3 52.8 57.4 84.0 83.3 74.7 60.0 W 64.2 August ........................ 71.9 71.3 65.5 56.8 52.1 57.2 80.8 80.2 71.1 60.6 NA 63.5 September .................. 71.1 70.6 65.1 57.6 52.5 57.7 79.8 79.3 70.5 61.2 W 63.9 October .......................

183

Table 12. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

January ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - February ..................... - - - - - - - - - - - - March .......................... - - - - - - - - - - - - April ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - May ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - June ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - July ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - August ........................ - - - - - - - - - - - - September .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - October ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - November ................... 77.9 77.7 72.6 60.3 58.7 65.2 89.8 89.5 77.9 69.0 - 75.4 December ................... 76.4 75.7 72.0 56.7 53.3 63.7 87.8 87.2 77.0 62.5 W 72.6 1994 ...............................

184

Table A2. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane, and Kerosene,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

PAD District I 1983 ...................................... 127.8 123.0 87.0 87.8 91.3 52.8 94.5 90.1 1984 ...................................... 124.7 119.5 83.5 85.0 93.3 50.9 106.0 92.2 1985 ...................................... 121.4 115.3 78.5 82.2 91.5 44.9 104.9 88.1 1986 ...................................... 100.6 91.8 52.8 52.2 86.0 32.7 81.0 61.6 1987 ...................................... 90.9 85.0 54.1 55.6 82.3 31.0 78.1 58.9 1988 ...................................... 89.5 82.9 51.2 51.3 84.8 29.8 73.3 55.3 1989 ...................................... 99.2 92.2 59.1 60.1 75.8 29.2 69.3 67.2 1990 ...................................... 112.3 105.3 75.9 78.3 91.8 45.0 86.4 84.4 1991 ...................................... 105.6 100.3 65.3 67.2 W 40.5 81.0 74.0 1992 ......................................

185

Table 8. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 1996 ................................ 79.7 79.1 74.3 66.5 60.7 66.4 88.4 87.8 80.1 70.0 NA 72.6 1997 January ....................... 82.4 81.7 76.7 71.2 66.2 70.8 91.4 90.9 83.1 75.4 - 77.2 February ..................... 80.7 80.1 74.9 68.5 64.3 68.3 90.1 89.5 81.3 72.3 - 74.5 March .......................... 78.5 77.9 72.4 66.1 62.7 66.2 88.4 87.9 78.7 70.1 W 72.2 April ............................ 78.7 77.9 73.1 65.0 60.7 65.2 88.3 87.8 78.8 69.0 - 71.4 May ............................. 79.6 79.1 73.4 67.3 61.9 67.1 88.7 88.3 79.1 70.3 - 72.5 June ............................ 78.5 78.0 72.1 63.7 59.1 64.0 87.7 87.2 78.5 66.8 - 69.6 July ............................. 76.6 76.1 69.7 63.6 57.5 63.3 85.8 85.4 76.2 67.1 - 69.1 August ........................ 82.0 81.5 75.8 70.8 63.9 70.3 91.1 90.7 81.9 74.4 - 76.1 September ..................

186

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1,312.3 1,312.3 32,821.9 41,410.1 112,727.4 28,125.2 182,262.7 8,740.5 9,015.4 W 15,226.6 W 27,455.8 February ............................. 33,062.4 34,813.3 43,506.0 120,110.9 28,668.6 192,285.5 9,196.3 9,492.7 W 16,071.5 W 29,126.3 March .................................. 32,634.8 34,295.4 43,645.3 122,321.7 30,937.8 196,904.8 9,385.0 9,689.1 W 16,559.0 W 29,420.1 April .................................... 34,010.4 35,657.9 43,864.5 121,891.1 27,743.2 193,498.9 9,410.9 9,694.5 W 16,548.6 W 29,584.3 May ..................................... 35,529.2 37,016.8 45,031.4 130,346.8 30,182.4 205,560.7 9,402.8 9,689.9 W 17,374.5 W 30,806.5 June .................................... 36,890.5 38,450.5 46,008.3 135,930.8

187

Table 6. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1997 January ....................... 83.0 82.5 77.2 71.9 67.8 72.4 92.4 92.0 82.9 76.1 W 79.1 February ..................... 82.4 81.9 77.3 69.3 65.8 70.4 91.9 91.5 82.8 73.2 W 77.5 March .......................... 80.4 79.9 76.6 66.9 64.9 68.7 90.1 89.7 82.3 71.0 74.8 76.0 April ............................ 80.3 79.7 77.7 65.5 62.4 67.7 89.9 89.6 82.9 69.6 W 75.4 May ............................. 81.0 80.5 76.5 67.6 62.3 68.6 90.2 89.9 82.3 70.8 W 75.7 June ............................ 79.7 79.2 74.9 63.9 58.9 65.6 89.1 88.7 80.8 67.2 W 73.0 July ............................. 77.9 77.4 72.4 63.9 57.9 64.8 87.3 86.9 78.4 67.5 W 71.9 August ........................ 83.2 82.8 79.2 71.4 66.1 72.2 92.7 92.3 85.4 75.3 W 79.5 September .................. 83.6 83.1 81.2 67.1 63.4 69.5 93.2 92.9 87.4 71.0 W 77.9 October .......................

188

Table 11. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 January ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - February ..................... - - - - - - - - - - - - March .......................... - - - - - - - - - - - - April ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - May ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - June ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - July ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - August ........................ - - - - - - - - - - - - September .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - October ....................... 7.5 7.8 21.1 10.8 2.1 34.0 1.5 1.5 5.1 W W 7.0 November ................... 9.7 10.0 25.5 15.1 2.3 43.0 1.9 2.0 6.1 W W 8.4 December ................... 10.0 10.3 25.8 14.6 2.7 43.1 2.0 2.0 6.0 W W 8.3 1993 ............................... - - - - - - - - - - - -

189

Table 35. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

69.6 69.6 54.8 54.8 78.5 58.1 63.1 87.0 63.8 67.2 73.7 56.2 57.6 February ............................. 65.2 53.7 52.5 74.8 55.7 59.7 83.0 61.4 64.4 69.4 54.9 55.1 March .................................. 61.7 51.4 49.7 71.2 52.6 56.4 79.4 58.3 61.1 65.9 52.5 52.3 April .................................... 63.9 53.9 52.3 73.2 56.3 59.2 81.3 62.4 63.8 68.1 55.3 54.9 May ..................................... 67.7 56.6 55.3 76.8 59.1 62.6 84.6 65.9 66.9 71.8 58.1 57.9 June .................................... 67.0 54.3 52.9 76.4 56.9 60.7 84.2 63.0 65.0 71.2 55.7 55.7 July ..................................... 65.5 52.5 51.5 75.3 56.1 59.1 83.4 61.9 63.7 69.9 54.1 54.3 August ................................ 62.7 48.0 47.6 72.8 51.3 55.6 80.7 56.1 60.1 67.2 49.5 50.6 September .......................... 61.5 48.1 48.1 71.4 51.3 55.6

190

Table 13. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

January ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - February ..................... - - - - - - - - - - - - March .......................... - - - - - - - - - - - - April ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - May ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - June ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - July ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - August ........................ - - - - - - - - - - - - September .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - October ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - November ................... 0.3 0.3 1.7 0.8 1.4 3.9 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 - 0.6 December ................... 6.7 7.0 23.0 W W 47.3 2.0 2.0 7.5 W W 10.7 1994 ...............................

191

Table 10. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

January ....................... 69.0 68.4 60.0 51.0 45.4 56.3 78.0 77.3 65.7 54.8 W 62.7 February ..................... 68.3 67.8 60.1 53.2 48.7 57.8 78.1 77.4 65.9 56.8 W 63.7 March .......................... 71.0 70.2 62.6 54.1 46.9 59.1 80.4 79.5 65.7 57.1 W 63.8 April ............................ 66.5 66.0 60.8 54.4 49.6 58.3 80.1 79.6 66.5 57.9 W 64.7 May ............................. 70.6 70.5 61.9 61.1 - 61.6 82.5 82.5 W W - 58.8 June ............................ 71.9 71.9 W 64.9 - 63.8 W W W W - W July ............................. 75.1 75.1 W 70.0 W 67.4 W W W W - W August ........................ 81.9 81.8 67.6 75.7 W 70.0 W 98.1 - 69.4 - 69.4 September .................. 80.9 80.5 74.1 65.4 54.6 67.8 94.1 93.5 77.1 62.1 W 71.6 October ....................... 78.7 78.3 73.5 63.7 57.8 69.5 89.5 89.2

192

Table 12. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1995 January ....................... 75.7 75.1 72.1 59.0 56.1 65.0 85.3 84.8 77.1 63.5 - 73.2 February ..................... 74.4 73.8 70.9 59.4 57.5 64.7 83.5 83.1 75.6 64.3 - 72.4 March .......................... 73.0 72.4 69.7 57.4 54.0 62.7 82.1 81.7 74.5 62.1 - 70.9 April ............................ 75.0 74.5 71.4 64.0 59.5 67.3 84.0 83.7 76.4 68.4 - 74.0 May ............................. 80.3 80.0 76.4 69.6 64.8 72.3 89.0 88.8 81.4 74.1 - 79.3 June ............................ 81.8 81.5 77.4 65.9 61.8 71.0 90.4 90.0 81.9 70.8 - 78.6 July ............................. 79.2 78.6 74.2 59.6 58.1 66.3 87.7 87.3 78.2 64.7 - 74.2 August ........................ 75.4 74.8 70.1 59.3 57.5 64.0 83.5 83.1 74.2 64.1 - 71.1 September .................. 72.6 72.2 68.3 60.5 58.0 63.9 80.5 80.2 72.4 64.7 - 70.2 October .......................

193

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 January ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - February ..................... - - - - - - - - - - - - March .......................... - - - - - - - - - - - - April ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - May ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - June ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - July ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - August ........................ - - - - - - - - - - - - September .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - October ....................... 27.2 28.7 26.9 105.7 16.1 148.6 7.3 7.5 8.0 W W 21.2 November ................... 25.0 26.3 22.1 105.9 14.6 142.6 6.7 7.0 6.7 W W 20.0 December ................... 24.6 25.9 22.2 107.5 18.0 147.6 6.6 6.9 7.0 W W

194

Table 12. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 January ....................... 71.4 71.0 67.6 59.2 56.0 63.1 80.9 80.6 72.3 63.8 - 69.9 February ..................... 72.2 71.7 67.8 59.8 56.8 63.2 81.3 81.0 73.1 64.2 - 70.5 March .......................... 76.7 76.3 72.0 65.8 65.5 68.8 86.0 85.7 77.9 70.0 - 75.6 April ............................ 87.7 87.3 83.5 77.0 77.3 80.2 96.5 96.2 88.8 81.4 - 86.7 May ............................. 95.7 95.3 91.7 77.0 74.8 83.4 105.1 104.7 96.8 81.4 - 92.2 June ............................ 93.5 92.9 89.1 70.5 68.0 78.9 103.0 102.4 94.0 75.1 - 88.3 July ............................. 88.8 88.4 85.3 70.7 68.7 77.3 98.6 98.3 90.3 75.2 - 85.6 August ........................ 84.3 84.0 79.9 68.9 65.2 73.4 94.0 93.7 85.1 73.4 W 81.5 September .................. 81.4 81.1 76.8 69.5 66.5 72.6 91.0 90.8 82.3 73.8 W 79.8 October .......................

195

Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2,177.8 2,177.8 33,696.7 41,031.4 115,778.7 25,866.5 182,676.6 9,536.5 9,794.2 12,905.9 15,962.1 - 28,868.0 February ............................. 33,085.6 34,725.7 42,808.2 121,887.8 32,127.0 196,822.9 9,746.2 10,022.4 13,588.9 16,896.7 - 30,485.6 March .................................. 34,978.9 36,685.7 45,070.0 122,489.6 28,845.0 196,404.5 9,984.6 10,254.2 W 16,980.4 W 30,689.3 April .................................... 36,627.7 38,654.6 46,870.7 132,107.0 39,827.2 218,805.0 9,633.1 9,933.5 13,367.1 17,002.1 - 30,369.2 May ..................................... 38,548.0 40,338.1 48,651.6 137,813.8 38,767.1 225,232.5 9,234.8 9,508.1 12,618.4 16,543.3 - 29,161.6 June .................................... 39,265.8 40,954.4 48,139.0 137,339.2 43,089.0

196

Table A2. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Aviation Fuels, Propane, and Kerosene,  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

PAD District I 1983 ...................................... 127.8 123.0 87.0 87.8 91.3 52.8 94.5 90.1 1984 ...................................... 124.7 119.5 83.5 85.0 93.3 50.9 106.0 92.2 1985 ...................................... 121.4 115.3 78.5 82.2 91.5 44.9 104.9 88.1 1986 ...................................... 100.6 91.8 52.8 52.2 86.0 32.7 81.0 61.6 1987 ...................................... 90.9 85.0 54.1 55.6 82.3 31.0 78.1 58.9 1988 ...................................... 89.5 82.9 51.2 51.3 84.8 29.8 73.3 55.3 1989 ...................................... 99.2 92.2 59.1 60.1 75.8 29.2 69.3 67.2 1990 ...................................... 112.3 105.3 75.9 78.3 91.8 45.0 86.4 84.4 1991 ...................................... 105.6 100.3 65.3 67.2 W 40.5 81.0 74.0 1992 ......................................

197

Table 11. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 1996 ................................ 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.9 W 5.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 - 0.9 1997 January ....................... 3.7 3.7 2.9 4.5 - 7.4 0.8 0.8 W 0.5 - 1.1 February ..................... 3.6 3.7 2.9 4.2 - 7.1 0.7 0.7 W 0.5 - 1.0 March .......................... 2.1 2.1 1.9 2.3 - 4.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 - 0.6 April ............................ 0.9 0.9 0.5 1.6 - 2.1 0.2 0.2 W 0.2 - 0.3 May ............................. 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.7 - 2.7 0.2 0.2 W 0.2 - 0.3 June ............................ 1.5 1.6 1.0 1.8 - 2.8 0.3 0.3 W 0.2 - 0.4 July ............................. 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.8 - 2.8 0.2 0.2 W 0.2 - 0.4 August ........................ 1.3 1.4 1.0 1.9 - 2.8 0.2 0.2 W 0.2 - 0.4 September .................. 1.6 1.6 1.3 2.4 - 3.7 0.2 0.2 W 0.4 - 0.6 October ....................... 2.1 2.2 2.0 4.2 - 6.3 0.4 0.4 W 0.7 - 1.1

198

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7,592.9 7,592.9 38,697.1 41,234.1 134,916.3 28,778.0 204,928.3 8,469.6 8,591.2 8,752.4 13,409.9 - 22,162.3 February ............................. 41,372.4 42,768.1 45,617.8 152,433.3 25,868.1 223,919.1 8,902.4 9,050.1 9,576.8 15,164.2 - 24,741.0 March .................................. 43,908.9 45,486.6 48,663.0 159,013.0 26,574.1 234,250.2 8,334.4 8,483.4 9,042.9 14,281.9 - 23,324.8 April .................................... 41,453.4 42,873.1 46,118.2 157,990.7 37,856.7 241,965.6 8,146.0 8,304.1 8,624.2 14,057.8 - 22,682.0 May ..................................... 43,079.5 44,622.1 47,391.3 165,547.2 35,485.2 248,423.6 8,461.1 8,619.3 8,946.6 15,071.0 - 24,017.6 June .................................... 45,869.9 47,451.1 49,767.2 169,463.5 41,245.2 260,475.9

199

Table 6. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 January ....................... 70.5 69.9 66.3 55.9 52.2 57.7 79.6 79.1 71.7 60.3 - 65.4 February ..................... 70.5 70.0 66.4 57.0 53.0 58.4 79.8 79.3 72.2 61.1 - 66.1 March .......................... 75.8 75.3 70.9 64.0 59.3 64.9 84.7 84.3 77.0 67.9 W 72.0 April ............................ 84.5 83.9 81.0 72.4 66.6 73.2 93.7 93.2 87.0 76.9 - 81.3 May ............................. 89.3 88.8 88.0 72.7 68.0 75.2 99.1 98.6 93.7 77.0 - 84.2 June ............................ 86.9 86.3 85.2 67.4 61.6 70.0 96.5 95.9 91.0 70.6 - 79.4 July ............................. 83.9 83.4 81.9 67.3 62.0 69.4 93.4 93.0 87.6 71.2 - 78.1 August ........................ 81.2 80.7 78.0 66.7 61.5 68.3 90.6 90.2 83.7 70.5 NA 76.1 September .................. 80.8 80.4 76.4 67.7 62.4 68.8 89.8 89.4 82.1 71.5 W 76.1 October .......................

200

Petroleum Products Table 43. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade, Sales Type, PAD District, and State  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2,177.8 2,177.8 33,696.7 41,031.4 115,778.7 25,866.5 182,676.6 9,536.5 9,794.2 12,905.9 15,962.1 - 28,868.0 February ............................. 33,085.6 34,725.7 42,808.2 121,887.8 32,127.0 196,822.9 9,746.2 10,022.4 13,588.9 16,896.7 - 30,485.6 March .................................. 34,978.9 36,685.7 45,070.0 122,489.6 28,845.0 196,404.5 9,984.6 10,254.2 W 16,980.4 W 30,689.3 April .................................... 36,627.7 38,654.6 46,870.7 132,107.0 39,827.2 218,805.0 9,633.1 9,933.5 13,367.1 17,002.1 - 30,369.2 May ..................................... 38,548.0 40,338.1 48,651.6 137,813.8 38,767.1 225,232.5 9,234.8 9,508.1 12,618.4 16,543.3 - 29,161.6 June .................................... 39,265.8 40,954.4 48,139.0 137,339.2 43,089.0

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

Table 10. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 January ....................... - - - - - - - - - - - - February ..................... - - - - - - - - - - - - March .......................... - - - - - - - - - - - - April ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - May ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - June ............................ - - - - - - - - - - - - July ............................. - - - - - - - - - - - - August ........................ - - - - - - - - - - - - September .................. - - - - - - - - - - - - October ....................... 78.0 77.4 70.6 61.2 53.1 66.5 84.5 83.7 75.1 63.7 W 71.9 November ................... 75.9 75.3 66.8 55.2 47.0 61.6 85.0 84.2 72.1 58.4 W 68.3 December ................... 71.5 70.9 62.2 48.2 42.7 56.2 80.7 79.9 68.1

202

Table 7. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1994 January ....................... 31.4 32.9 44.3 108.4 22.6 175.3 8.1 8.4 12.1 13.6 0.2 25.9 February ..................... 32.5 34.2 46.7 112.6 21.0 180.2 8.3 8.6 12.2 14.4 0.1 26.7 March .......................... 34.4 36.2 48.0 116.1 21.1 185.3 8.4 8.7 12.8 15.4 0.2 28.4 April ............................ 34.2 35.8 48.0 119.8 24.1 191.9 8.4 8.7 12.9 15.5 0.1 28.6 May ............................. 34.6 36.3 48.2 120.2 24.3 192.7 8.5 8.8 12.9 15.9 0.1 29.0 June ............................ 35.8 37.5 49.2 124.7 24.5 198.4 8.6 8.9 13.3 16.5 0.3 30.1 July ............................. 35.1 36.6 48.4 123.3 21.3 193.0 8.6 8.8 13.0 16.2 0.2 29.5 August ........................ 36.0 37.6 49.0 128.1 25.0 202.0 8.6 8.9 13.0 16.7 0.2 30.0 September .................. 35.1 36.6 47.5 124.8 26.0 198.3 8.3 8.6 12.7 16.0 0.2 28.9 October

203

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 1996 ................................ 24.1 25.4 17.8 108.5 27.1 153.4 5.7 5.9 4.4 12.9 NA 17.3 1997 January ....................... 20.6 22.0 14.8 98.3 26.4 139.6 4.7 4.9 3.7 11.5 - 15.1 February ..................... 22.1 23.7 15.4 102.9 31.2 149.5 5.0 5.2 3.8 11.9 - 15.7 March .......................... 24.0 25.5 16.8 106.4 27.7 150.9 5.5 5.7 4.0 12.2 W 16.2 April ............................ 25.1 26.9 18.2 111.8 26.9 156.9 5.8 5.9 4.2 12.9 - 17.0 May ............................. 24.7 26.0 17.7 112.7 26.3 156.7 5.7 5.8 4.2 13.0 - 17.1 June ............................ 25.6 26.9 17.7 115.4 22.1 155.2 5.9 6.1 4.2 13.3 - 17.4 July ............................. 27.8 29.1 17.2 123.4 25.2 165.8 6.4 6.6 4.1 14.4 - 18.5 August ........................ 27.3 28.7 17.3 119.9 24.7 161.9 6.2 6.4 4.0 13.5 - 17.6 September ..................

204

Table A1. Refiner/Reseller Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade, PAD District  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

PAD District I 1984 ...................................... 92.3 84.8 NA NA 102.5 92.4 91.6 84.2 1985 ...................................... 93.6 85.2 NA NA 104.2 93.3 93.4 85.2 1986 ...................................... 63.9 53.2 NA NA 76.1 62.1 65.3 55.2 1987 ...................................... 67.5 57.7 NA NA 80.5 68.2 69.9 60.6 1988 ...................................... 67.1 56.1 NA NA 81.3 68.7 70.8 60.2 1989 ...................................... 74.1 62.7 82.0 70.0 90.5 76.7 79.4 67.9 1990 ...................................... 87.6 77.7 94.8 83.2 101.9 89.0 91.8 81.5 1991 ...................................... 79.2 70.6 87.5 75.7 95.9 83.2 83.8 74.2 1992 ...................................... 74.0 65.1 84.1 71.4 93.0 78.4 79.6 69.3 1993 ...................................... 69.7 59.0 80.2 66.1

205

Table 10. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1995 January ....................... 76.6 76.4 69.5 60.6 56.1 64.7 85.7 85.6 74.4 64.0 - 70.0 February ..................... 76.2 76.1 69.9 62.8 55.2 66.0 86.3 86.2 73.4 65.3 - 69.2 March .......................... 77.3 77.2 72.4 65.1 - 68.9 85.7 85.6 75.1 66.1 - 70.0 April ............................ 83.4 83.4 76.7 67.9 - 71.5 91.1 90.9 W 69.7 - 73.8 May ............................. 89.0 88.8 80.4 71.8 - 75.2 95.4 95.3 W 73.5 - 77.7 June ............................ 90.7 90.7 80.4 66.5 - 71.9 97.6 97.4 W 68.7 - 75.0 July ............................. 88.1 88.1 77.9 62.6 - 68.5 92.4 92.4 W 63.9 - 69.6 August ........................ 84.8 84.8 76.8 63.7 - 68.7 87.7 87.6 W 65.3 - 69.8 September .................. 83.4 83.1 74.3 66.4 69.3 69.4 85.2 85.1 75.6 69.1 - 72.4 October ....................... 75.6 75.3

206

Table 7. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1993 January ....................... 33.5 35.0 - - - 170.6 8.2 8.4 - - - 25.2 February ..................... 35.3 37.0 - - - 179.9 8.6 8.8 - - - 27.0 March .......................... 35.6 37.4 - - - 182.3 8.5 8.8 - - - 26.8 April ............................ 36.5 38.3 - - - 184.4 8.6 8.9 - - - 27.6 May ............................. 36.1 37.7 - - - 182.2 8.6 8.9 - - - 27.1 June ............................ 38.0 39.7 - - - 191.9 8.9 9.2 - - - 28.2 July ............................. 36.5 38.0 - - - 189.3 9.0 9.3 - - - 28.9 August ........................ 36.1 37.7 - - - 187.0 9.0 9.2 - - - 28.4 September .................. 35.5 37.1 - - - 181.9 8.6 8.9 - - - 27.9 October ....................... 34.5 36.2 47.9 116.5 18.2 182.6 8.7 9.0 13.1 14.9 0.2 28.1 November ................... 34.7 36.2

207

Table 6. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average 1983...

208

Table 10. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Prices by...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average 1994...

209

Table 11. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Volumes by...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Sales for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total 1993 January...

210

Table 12. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Prices by...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average 1993 January...

211

Table 7. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Sales for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total 1983...

212

Table 13. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Volumes by...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Sales for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total Through Retail Outlets Total a DTW Rack Bulk Total 1993 January...

213

Table 10. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Prices by...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

for Resale Sales to End Users Sales for Resale Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average Through Retail Outlets Average a DTW Rack Bulk Average 1993 January...

214

Table 13. U.S. Refiner Reformulated Motor Gasoline Volumes by...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

- - - - - - - November ... 0.3 0.3 1.7 0.8 1.4 3.9 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 - 0.6 December ... 6.7 7.0 23.0 W W 47.3 2.0 2.0 7.5 W W 10.7 1994...

215

Table 46. Refiner No. 2 Distillate, Diesel Fuel, and Fuel Oil...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

14,904.2 64,004.5 7,706.0 13,736.2 22,610.2 77,740.7 3,589.8 33,377.1 26,199.9 111,117.7 December ... 13,026.7 56,295.0 7,550.1 15,171.0 20,576.8 71,466.0...

216

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

16.7 November ... 24.3 25.5 14.7 104.9 25.4 145.1 5.5 5.7 3.5 11.9 - 15.4 December ... 25.1 26.4 14.8 107.4 28.4 150.7 5.8 6.0 3.5 12.6 - 16.1 1997...

217

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

25.1 143.7 5.7 5.9 4.0 13.5 - 17.5 November ... 20.3 21.5 13.9 100.4 26.5 140.8 5.4 5.6 3.9 13.5 - 17.4 December ... 20.3 21.4 13.9 98.4 28.4...

218

Table 9. U.S. Refiner Conventional Motor Gasoline Volumes by...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

27.2 28.7 26.9 105.7 16.1 148.6 7.3 7.5 8.0 W W 21.2 November ... 25.0 26.3 22.1 105.9 14.6 142.6 6.7 7.0 6.7 W W 20.0 December ... 24.6 25.9...

219

Table A3. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Distillate and Residual...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Fuel Oils, by PAD District, 1983-Present (Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes) Geographic Area Year No. 1 Distillate No. 2 Distillate a No. 4 Fuel b Residual Fuel Oil Sales to End...

220

Table A3. Refiner/Reseller Prices of Distillate and Residual...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

75.1 71.9 64.4 60.6 W W 43.5 41.6 1998 ... 55.7 55.2 51.2 44.2 W W 32.9 30.5 1999 ... 54.9 54.6 60.8 49.5 W...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

Table 10. U.S. Refiner Oxygenated Motor Gasoline Prices by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 January ....................... 76.3 76.0 70.4 61.4 W 65.6 84.0 83.8 76.0 64.8 - 72.0 February ..................... 77.6 77.4 72.3 64.4 - 68.2 85.7 85.7 78.4 67.4 - 74.2 March .......................... 84.7 84.4 79.5 72.2 W 75.8 90.8 90.8 85.3 74.5 - 81.4 April ............................ 94.0 93.6 87.2 76.1 - 80.0 101.6 101.6 93.6 77.3 - 86.2 May ............................. 99.1 98.6 94.3 76.1 - 82.3 108.1 107.9 99.8 77.3 - 88.1 June ............................ 97.9 97.5 NA 76.5 - 82.3 105.7 105.7 98.3 77.4 - 87.6 July ............................. 95.8 95.4 NA 75.0 - 80.6 103.7 103.6 96.5 76.0 - 85.9 August ........................ 97.2 96.8 NA 78.1 - 83.2 104.3 104.3 NA 79.8 - 87.9 September .................. 97.8 97.3 88.4 79.7 - 83.2 104.5 104.4 94.1 82.5 - 88.4 October .......................

222

Table 7. U.S. Refiner Motor Gasoline Volumes by Grade and Sales Type  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1996 January ....................... 32.2 33.7 41.0 115.8 25.9 182.7 9.5 9.8 12.9 16.0 - 28.9 February ..................... 33.1 34.7 42.8 121.9 32.1 196.8 9.7 10.0 13.6 16.9 - 30.5 March .......................... 35.0 36.7 45.1 122.5 28.8 196.4 10.0 10.3 13.7 17.0 W 30.7 April ............................ 36.6 38.7 46.9 132.1 39.8 218.8 9.6 9.9 13.4 17.0 - 30.4 May ............................. 38.5 40.3 48.7 137.8 38.8 225.2 9.2 9.5 12.6 16.5 - 29.2 June ............................ 39.3 41.0 48.1 137.3 43.1 228.6 9.6 9.8 12.6 16.6 - 29.3 July ............................. 38.6 40.4 47.3 141.2 40.8 229.4 9.5 9.8 12.6 17.4 - 29.9 August ........................ 38.8 40.7 48.0 141.8 35.2 225.0 9.6 10.0 12.7 17.3 NA 30.1 September .................. 37.9 39.6 46.6 131.4 31.5 209.5 9.4 9.6 12.4 15.9 W 28.4 October .......................

223

FY 2006 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Comparable Comparable Request to FY 2006 vs. FY 2005 Approp Approp Congress Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply Operation and maintenance................................................. 787,941 909,903 862,499 -47,404 -5.2% Construction......................................................................... 6,956 22,416 40,175 17,759 +79.2% Total, Energy supply................................................................ 794,897 932,319 902,674 -29,645 -3.2% Non-Defense site acceleration completion............................. 167,272 157,316 172,400 15,084 +9.6%

224

FY 2013 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

8 8 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0078 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2013 Congressional Budget

225

FY 2010 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2009 FY 2010 Current Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Recovery Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 1,704,112 2,178,540 16,800,000 2,318,602 +140,062 +6.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 136,170 137,000 4,500,000 208,008 +71,008 +51.8% Nuclear energy.............................................................................. 960,903 792,000 -- 761,274 -30,726 -3.9% Legacy management..................................................................... 33,872 -- -- --

226

FY 2012 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6 6 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0066 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled

227

FY 2012 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2Statistical Table by Appropriation 2Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2011 FY 2012 Current Congressional Annualized Congressional Approp. Request CR Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 2,216,392 2,355,473 2,242,500 3,200,053 +983,661 +44.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 168,484 185,930 171,982 237,717 +69,233 +41.1% Nuclear energy............................................................................. 774,578 824,052 786,637 754,028 -20,550 -2.7% Fossil energy programs Fossil energy research and development................................... 659,770 586,583 672,383 452,975

228

FY 2007 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance............................................ 1,779,399 1,791,372 1,917,331 +125,959 +7.0% Construction................................................................... 22,416 21,255 6,030 -15,225 -71.6% Total, Energy supply and conservation.............................. 1,801,815 1,812,627 1,923,361 +110,734 +6.1% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology..................................................... -160,000 -20,000 -- +20,000 +100.0% Fossil energy research and development.......................

229

FY 2012 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5 5 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0065 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2012 Congressional Budget

230

FY 2008 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 Current Congressional Congressional Approp. Request Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance........................................... 1,781,242 1,917,331 2,187,943 +270,612 +14.1% Construction.................................................................... 31,155 6,030 -- -6,030 -100.0% Total, Energy supply and conservation............................. 1,812,397 1,923,361 2,187,943 +264,582 +13.8% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................... -20,000 -- -58,000 -58,000 N/A Fossil energy research and development......................

231

TABLE27.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Natural Gas Plant Net Production and Stocks of Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Note: Refer to Appendix A for Refining District descriptions. Source: Energy Information...

232

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Geographic Location Tables Geographic Location Tables (24 pages, 136kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 3. Census Region, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 4. Census Region and Division, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 5. Census Region and Division, Floorspace, 1995 Table 6. Climate Zone, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 7. Metropolitan Status, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

233

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

2003 Detailed Tables 2003 Detailed Tables 2003 CBECS Detailed Tables most recent available Released: September 2008 Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures | End-Use Consumption In the 2003 CBECS, the survey procedures for strip shopping centers and enclosed malls ("mall buildings") were changed from those used in previous surveys, and, as a result, mall buildings are now excluded from most of the 2003 CBECS tables. Therefore, some data in the majority of the tables are not directly comparable with previous CBECS tables, all of which included mall buildings. Some numbers in the 2003 tables will be slightly lower than earlier surveys since the 2003 figures do not include mall buildings. See "Change in Data Collection Procedures for Malls" for a more detailed explanation.

234

Using supercritical fluids to refine hydrocarbons  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

This is a method to reactively refine hydrocarbons, such as heavy oils with API gravities of less than 20.degree. and bitumen-like hydrocarbons with viscosities greater than 1000 cp at standard temperature and pressure using a selected fluid at supercritical conditions. The reaction portion of the method delivers lighter weight, more volatile hydrocarbons to an attached contacting device that operates in mixed subcritical or supercritical modes. This separates the reaction products into portions that are viable for use or sale without further conventional refining and hydro-processing techniques. This method produces valuable products with fewer processing steps, lower costs, increased worker safety due to less processing and handling, allow greater opportunity for new oil field development and subsequent positive economic impact, reduce related carbon dioxide, and wastes typical with conventional refineries.

Yarbro, Stephen Lee

2014-11-25T23:59:59.000Z

235

Improve corrosion control in refining processes  

SciTech Connect

New guidelines show how to control corrosion and environmental cracking of process equipment when processing feedstocks containing sulfur and/or naphthenic acids. To be cost competitive refiners must be able to process crudes of opportunity. These feedstocks when processed under high temperatures and pressures and alkaline conditions can cause brittle cracks and blisters in susceptible steel-fabricated equipment. Even with advances in steel metallurgy, wet H{sub 2}S cracking continues to be a problem. New research data shows that process conditions such as temperature, pH and flowrate are key factors in the corrosion process. Before selecting equipment material, operators must understand the corrosion mechanisms present within process conditions. Several case histories investigate the corrosion reactions found when refining naphthenic crudes and operating amine gas-sweetening systems. These examples show how to use process controls, inhibitors and/or metallurgy to control corrosion and environmental cracking, to improve material selection and to extend equipment service life.

Kane, R.D.; Cayard, M.S. [CLI International, Houston, TX (United States)

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

236

Parabolic refined invariants and Macdonald polynomials  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

A string theoretic derivation is given for the conjecture of Hausel, Letellier, and Rodriguez-Villegas on the cohomology of character varieties with marked points. Their formula is identified with a refined BPS expansion in the stable pair theory of a local root stack, generalizing previous work of the first two authors in collaboration with G. Pan. Haiman's geometric construction for Macdonald polynomials is shown to emerge naturally in this context via geometric engineering. In particular this yields a new conjectural relation between Macdonald polynomials and refined local orbifold curve counting invariants. The string theoretic approach also leads to a new spectral cover construction for parabolic Higgs bundles in terms of holomorphic symplectic orbifolds.

Chuang, Wu-yen; Donagi, Ron; Pantev, Tony

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Genealogy of major U.S. refiners - Energy Information Administration  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

See full Genealogy of Major U.S. Refiners Previous Release Genealogy of Major U.S. Refiners Genealogy of Major U.S. Refiners Release date: September 18, 2013 figre 1. World energy consumption, 1990-2040. The structure of the U.S. petroleum refining industry has changed substantially over the past several years. In the diagram the companies shown on the right side are presently active in U.S. refining. The transactions over the past 25 years that created these companies also are shown. The transactions included here may be as little as a single refinery, or as much as all the refining assets of the parties to the transaction. Transactions that include less than all refining assets are indicated by vertical dotted lines while vertical solid lines indicate that all refining assets are included. Additionally,

238

Grain Refinement of Permanent Mold Cast Copper Base Alloys  

SciTech Connect

Grain refinement is a well established process for many cast and wrought alloys. The mechanical properties of various alloys could be enhanced by reducing the grain size. Refinement is also known to improve casting characteristics such as fluidity and hot tearing. Grain refinement of copper-base alloys is not widely used, especially in sand casting process. However, in permanent mold casting of copper alloys it is now common to use grain refinement to counteract the problem of severe hot tearing which also improves the pressure tightness of plumbing components. The mechanism of grain refinement in copper-base alloys is not well understood. The issues to be studied include the effect of minor alloy additions on the microstructure, their interaction with the grain refiner, effect of cooling rate, and loss of grain refinement (fading). In this investigation, efforts were made to explore and understand grain refinement of copper alloys, especially in permanent mold casting conditions.

M.Sadayappan; J.P.Thomson; M.Elboujdaini; G.Ping Gu; M. Sahoo

2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

239

Hardware/Software Co-Design via Specification Refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

. The Rosetta refinement capability extends this by allowing a system's functional behavior and its implementation details to be described separately. The Rosetta Refinement Tool combines the functional behavior and the implementation details to form a system...

Peck, Wesley Graham

2011-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

240

5.841 Crystal Structure Refinement, Fall 2006  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This course in crystal structure refinement examines the practical aspects of crystal structure determination from data collection strategies to data reduction and basic and advanced refinement problems of organic and ...

Mueller, Peter

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

5.067 Crystal Structure Refinement, Fall 2007  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This course in crystal structure refinement examines the practical aspects of crystal structure determination from data collection strategies to data reduction and basic and advanced refinement problems of organic and ...

Mueller, Peter

242

Verification of microarchitectural refinements in rule-based systems  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Microarchitectural refinements are often required to meet performance, area, or timing constraints when designing complex digital systems. While refinements are often straightforward to implement, it is difficult to formally ...

Dave, Nirav H.

243

file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\VM3\My%20Documents\hc6-1a_  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Table HC6-1a. Usage Indicators by Climate Zone, Table HC6-1a. Usage Indicators by Climate Zone, Million U.S. Households, 2001 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Climate Zone 1 | | |_________________________________________________| | | | | | | Fewer than 2,000 CDD and -- | |

244

Error estimation and adaptive mesh refinement for aerodynamic flows  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Error estimation and adaptive mesh refinement for aerodynamic flows Ralf Hartmann, Joachim Held-oriented mesh refinement for single and multiple aerodynamic force coefficients as well as residual-based mesh refinement applied to various three-dimensional lam- inar and turbulent aerodynamic test cases defined

Hartmann, Ralf

245

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2004 2004 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2004 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector d,e Retail Electricity Total Energy d,f Coal Natural Gas Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass c Total d,e,f Distillate Fuel Jet Fuel LPG a Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Other b Total Alabama 1.57 7.72 11.91 8.82 15.78 13.68 4.78 8.25 12.28 0.43 1.81 5.32 1.68 18.01 11.29 Alaska 1.91 3.59 12.43 9.61 19.64 15.55 3.63 12.09 11.05 - 6.68 9.07 3.18 32.29 11.09 Arizona 1.31 6.84 13.59 9.53 18.40 15.33 5.29 7.23 13.92 0.45 5.90 6.68 2.18 21.83 15.24 Arkansas 1.25 8.09 12.01 8.30 14.80 13.97 4.67 11.02 12.77 0.49 1.79 6.59 1.43 16.76 11.89 California 1.82 7.63 13.58

246

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7) 7) August 2009 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2007 2007 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector e,f Retail Electricity Total Energy e,g Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total e,f,g Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel LPG b Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Oil Other c Total Wood and Waste d Alabama 2.17 9.06 19.43 16.20 21.84 21.26 8.46 14.19 19.62 0.42 2.71 7.47 2.29 22.46 16.01 Alaska 2.34 5.76 19.43 16.35 28.63 22.14 11.51 23.69 17.97 - 10.51 14.88 4.94 38.96 17.87 Arizona 1.61 8.44 19.84 16.24 27.16 21.95 10.04 11.27 20.50 0.57 10.86 9.61 2.78 25.02 20.72 Arkansas 1.65 9.33 19.63 15.73 21.10 21.54 8.65 18.76 20.42 0.57 2.66 9.45 1.98 20.57

247

Table of Contents  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

NT0005638 NT0005638 Cruise Report 1-19 July 2009 HYFLUX Sea Truth Cruise Northern Gulf of Mexico Submitted by: Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Dr. Corpus Christi, TX 78412 Principal Authors: Ian R. MacDonald and Thomas Naehr Prepared for: United States Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory October 30, 2009 Office of Fossil Energy HYFLUX Seatruth Cruise Report -1- Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................. 2 Participating Organizations ................................................................................................. 3 Major Equipment ................................................................................................................ 4

248

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Table 2. Total Energy Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 5. Total Coal Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 6. Total Electricity Sales, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 7. Crude Oil Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 8. Natural Gas Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 9. Coal Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 12. Net Coal Exports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 13. World Oil Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 15. Coal Prices to Electric Utilities, Actual vs. Forecasts

249

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Download Adobe Acrobat Reader Printer friendly version on our site are provided in Adobe Acrobat Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Actual vs. Forecasts Formats Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF Table 12. World Oil Prices Excel, PDF Table 13. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices

250

Help:Tables | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Tables Tables Jump to: navigation, search Tables may be authored in wiki pages using either XHTML table elements directly, or using wikicode formatting to define the table. XHTML table elements and their use are well described on various web pages and will not be discussed here. The benefit of wikicode is that the table is constructed of character symbols which tend to make it easier to perceive the table structure in the article editing view compared to XHTML table elements. As a general rule, it is best to avoid using a table unless you need one. Table markup often complicates page editing. Contents 1 Wiki table markup summary 2 Basics 2.1 Table headers 2.2 Caption 3 XHTML attributes 3.1 Attributes on tables 3.2 Attributes on cells 3.3 Attributes on rows 3.4 HTML colspan and rowspan

251

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Conservation Tables Conservation Tables (16 pages, 86 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 41. Energy Conservation Features, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 42. Building Shell Conservation Features, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 43. Building Shell Conservation Features, Floorspace, 1995 Table 44. Reduction in Equipment Use During Off Hours, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

252

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Structure Tables Structure Tables (16 pages, 93 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 8. Building Size, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 9. Building Size, Floorspace, 1995 Table 10. Year Constructed, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 11. Year Constructed, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings and 58.8 billion square feet of commercial floorspace in the U.S. The 1995 data are available for the four Census

253

CARINA Data Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Cruise Summary Table and Data Cruise Summary Table and Data Users are requested to report any data or metadata errors in the CARINA cruise files to CDIAC. Parameter units in all CARINA data files are in CCHDO exchange format. No Cruise Namea (Alias) Areab Number of Stations Datec Ship Chief Scientist Carbon PI Oxygen Nutrients TCO2d TALK pCO2e pHf CFC Other Measurements Data Files 1 06AQ19920929g (06ANTX_6) (See map) 2 118 9/29-11/30/1992 Polarstern V. Smetacek M. Stoll, J. Rommets, H. De Baar, D. Bakker 62 114h 53 54i U C 0 Choloroa,b Fluorescence, NH4 Data Files (Metadata) 2 06AQ19930806 (06ARKIX_4) (See map) 4 64 8/6-10/5/1993 Polarstern D.K. Fütterer L. Anderson 64 63 63j, bb 0 0 0 59he 3H, 3He, 18O, 14C, 85Kr, Bak Data Files

254

Supplement Tables - Contact  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplement Tables to the AEO99 Supplement Tables to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage furtherinfo.gif (5474 bytes) The Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) was prepared by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, under the direction of Mary J. Hutzler (mhutzler@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222). General questions may be addressed to Arthur T. Andersen (aanderse@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-1441), Director of the International, Economic, and Greenhouse Gas Division; Susan H. Holte (sholte@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-4838), Director of the Demand and Integration Division; James M. Kendell (jkendell@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-9646), Director of the Oil and Gas Division; Scott Sitzer (ssitzer@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2308), Director of the Coal and Electric Power Division; or Andy S. Kydes (akydes@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222), Senior Modeling Analyst. Detailed questions about the forecasts and related model components may be addressed to the following analysts:

255

Appendix B: Summary Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman Appendix B: Summary Tables Table B1. The BCES and alternative cases compared to the Reference case, 2025 2009 2025 Ref Ref BCES All Clean Partial Credit Revised Baseline Small Utilities Credit Cap 2.1 Credit Cap 3.0 Stnds + Cds Generation (billion kilowatthours) Coal 1,772 2,049 1,431 1,305 1,387 1,180 1,767 1,714 1,571 1,358 Petroleum 41 45 43 44 44 44 45 45 45 43 Natural Gas 931 1,002 1,341 1,342 1,269 1,486 1,164 1,193 1,243 1,314 Nuclear 799 871 859 906 942 889 878 857 843 826 Conventional Hydropower 274 306 322 319 300 321 316 298 312 322 Geothermal 15 25 28 25 31 24 27 22 23 24 Municipal Waste 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Wood and Other Biomass 38 162 303 289 295 301 241 266

256

CBECS 1992 - Consumption & Expenditures, Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Figure on Energy Consumption in Commercial Buildings by Energy Source, 1992 Divider Line The 49 tables present detailed energy consumption and expenditure data for buildings in the commercial sector. This section provides assistance in reading the tables by explaining some of the headings for the data categories. It will also explain the use of row and column factors to compute both the confidence levels of the estimates given in the tables and the statistical significance of differences between the data in two or more categories. The section concludes with a "Quick-Reference Guide" to the statistics in the different tables. Categories of Data in the Tables After Table 3.1, which is a summary table, the tables are grouped into the major fuel tables (Tables 3.2 through 3.13) and the specific fuel tables (Tables 3.14 through 3.29 for electricity, Tables 3.30 through 3.40 for natural gas, Tables 3.41 through 3.45 for fuel oil, and Tables 3.46 through 3.47 for district heat). Table 3.48 presents energy management and DSM data as reported by the building respondent. Table 3.49 presents data on participation in electric utility-sponsored DSM programs as reported by both the building respondent and the electricity supplier.

257

1997 Housing Characteristics Tables Housing Unit Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Million U.S. Households; 45 pages, 128 kb) Million U.S. Households; 45 pages, 128 kb) Contents Pages HC1-1a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Climate Zone, Million U.S. Households, 1997 4 HC1-2a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Year of Construction, Million U.S. Households, 1997 4 HC1-3a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Household Income, Million U.S. Households, 1997 4 HC1-4a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Housing Unit, Million U.S. Households, 1997 3 HC1-5a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Owner-Occupied Housing Unit, Million U.S. Households, 1997 3 HC1-6a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Type of Rented Housing Unit, Million U.S. Households, 1997 3 HC1-7a. Housing Unit Characteristics by Four Most Populated States, Million U.S. Households, 1997 4

258

Microsoft Word - table_87  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and natural gas plant liquids production, by state, 2012 Alabama 87,269 5,309 7,110 Alabama Onshore Alabama 33,921 2,614 3,132 Alabama Offshore Alabama 53,348 2,695 3,978 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Onshore California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Offshore California NA NA NA Federal Offshore California NA NA NA

259

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 5 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 8 1.2 Vacuum System 12 1.3 Power Supplies 14 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.7 Beam Line Front Ends 19 1.8 Facilities 19 1.9 Installation 20 2.1 Accelerator Physics 21 2 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress The progress and highlights of each major technical system are summarized below. Additional details are provided in Section B. Magnets - As of the end of this quarter (March 31, 2002), the status of magnet fabrication is as follows: Magnet Type Number Received % of Total Received Dipoles 40 100% Quadrupoles 102 100% Sextupoles 76 100%

260

Reviews, Tables, and Plots  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

4 Review of Particle Physics 4 Review of Particle Physics Please use this CITATION: S. Eidelman et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004) (bibtex) Standalone figures are now available for these reviews. Categories: * Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties * Standard Model and Related Topics * Particle Properties * Hypothetical Particles * Astrophysics and Cosmology * Experimental Methods and Colliders * Mathematical Tools * Kinematics, Cross-Section Formulae, and Plots * Authors, Introductory Text, History plots PostScript help file PDF help file Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties Physical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (1 page) Astrophysical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (2 pages) International System of units (SI) PS PDF (2 pages) Periodic table of the elements (Rev.) errata PS PDF (1 page)

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Table G3  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

1905-0194 1905-0194 Expiration Date: 07/31/2013 May 28, 2010 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 14 Table G3. Decision Chart for a Start Year Report for a Large Emitter Intending To Register Reductions Report Characteristics Reporting Requirements Schedule I Schedule II (For Each Subentity) Schedule III Schedule IV Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 & Add. A Sec. 3 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Part A Part B Part C Independent Verification? All A- or B-Rated Methods? Foreign Emissions? Entity-Wide Reductions Only? Entity Statement Aggregated Emissions by Gas (Domestic and Foreign) † Emissions Inventory by Source

262

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

through June 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 9 1.2 Vacuum System 16 1.3 Power Supplies 21 1.4 RF System 25 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 26 1.6 Cable Plant 28 1.8 Facilities 28 2.0 Accelerator Physics 29 2.1 ES&H 31 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress Magnet System - The project has received three shipments of magnets from IHEP. A total of 55 dipole, quadrupole and sextupole magnets out of 218 have arrived. All main magnets will arrive by December. The additional mechanical and electrical checks of the magnets at SSRL have been successful. Only minor mechanical problems were found and corrected. The prototype

263

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AC05-00OR22800 AC05-00OR22800 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page # TOC - i SECTION A - SOLICITATION/OFFER AND AWARD ......................................................................... A-i SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS ........................................................ B-i B.1 SERVICES BEING ACQUIRED ....................................................................................B-2 B.2 TRANSITION COST, ESTIMATED COST, MAXIMUM AVAILABLE FEE, AND AVAILABLE FEE (Modification 295, 290, 284, 280, 270, 257, 239, 238, 219, M201, M180, M162, M153, M150, M141, M132, M103, M092, M080, M055, M051, M049, M034, M022, M003, A002) ..........................................................B-2 SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/WORK STATEMENT DESCRIPTION OF

264

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

U U U . . S S . . D D E E P P A A R R T T M M E E N N T T O O F F E E N N E E R R G G Y Y O O F F F F I I C C E E O O F F I I N N S S P P E E C C T T O O R R G G E E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOE/IG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ..................................................... 2 Impacts Key Accomplishments ............................................................................................... 3 Positive Outcomes ...................................................................................................... 3 Reports Investigative Outcomes .............................................................................................. 6 Audits ......................................................................................................................... 8

265

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

October October through December 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 7 1.2 Vacuum System 9 1.3 Power Supplies 13 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.9 Installation 19 2.0 Accelerator Physics 20 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress In the magnet area, the production of all major components (dipoles, quadrupoles, and sextupoles) has been completed on schedule. This results from a highly successful collaboration with our colleagues at the Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP) in Beijing. The production of corrector magnets is still in progress with completion scheduled for May 2002.

266

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel c2-pdf c2.xls c2.html Table C3. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels c3.pdf c3.xls c3.html Table C4. Expenditures for...

267

2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Table of Contents 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents June 2014 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents The Table of...

268

FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Summary Table FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table Summary Table by Appropriations Summary Table by Organization More Documents & Publications FY 2014 Budget Request Statistical...

269

ARM - Instrument - s-table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

govInstrumentss-table govInstrumentss-table Documentation S-TABLE : Instrument Mentor Monthly Summary (IMMS) reports S-TABLE : Data Quality Assessment (DQA) reports ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument : Stabilized Platform (S-TABLE) Instrument Categories Ocean Observations For ship-based deployments, some instruments require actively stabilized platforms to compensate for the ship's motion, especially rotations around the long axis of the ship (roll), short axis (pitch), and, for some instruments, vertical axis (yaw). ARM currently employs two types of stabilized platforms: one electrically controlled for lighter instruments that includes yaw control (dubbed RPY for Roll, Pitch, Yaw) and one

270

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) MS Excel Viewer PDF (Acrobat Reader required Download Acrobat Reader ) Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF

271

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) PDF (Acrobat Reader required) Table 2. Total Energy Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales HTML, Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 12. Net Coal Exports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 13. World Oil Prices HTML, Excel, PDF

272

Renewable Energy Project Refinement Webinar | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Renewable Energy Project Refinement Webinar Renewable Energy Project Refinement Webinar Renewable Energy Project Refinement Webinar May 28, 2014 11:00AM MDT Attendees will become familiar with the three components of project refinement: project financing strategies, off-taker agreements, and vendor selection. Project refinement obstacles, particularly financing, can deter the deployment of renewable energy projects on tribal lands. Attendees will learn about the financial resources and ownership options available-including venture capital and innovative financing-that can help Tribes overcome longstanding barriers and attract higher levels of private investment. Finally, attendees will learn how project refinement can accelerate renewable energy development and, with it, tribal economic and community development. There is no cost to attend the webinar, but

273

A CSP Account of Event-B Refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Event-B provides a flexible framework for stepwise system development via refinement. The framework supports steps for (a) refining events (one-by-one), (b) splitting events (one-by-many), and (c) introducing new events. In each of the steps events can moreover possibly be anticipated or convergent. All such steps are accompanied with precise proof obligations. Still, it remains unclear what the exact relationship - in terms of a behaviour-oriented semantics - between an Event-B machine and its refinement is. In this paper, we give a CSP account of Event-B refinement, with a treatment for the first time of splitting events and of anticipated events. To this end, we define a CSP semantics for Event-B and show how the different forms of Event-B refinement can be captured as CSP refinement.

Schneider, Steve; Wehrheim, Heike; 10.4204/EPTCS.55.9

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

274

Refinement of synchroton spectral tip calculations  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Refinements in the computing techniques were performed in the calculation of transition rates to the ground and first excited states in magnetic bremsstrahlung via the use of exact matrix elements. The above calculations were carried out to double precision on a UNIVAC 1108 computer as was the calculation of transition rates to the second excited state. Empirical formulas are given for the transition rates from arbitrary upper states to the ground state, first excited state, and the second excited state for arbitrary magnetic field strengths. In addition the relative probabilities of transitions from level three to the remaining three lower levels is investigated in detail in the vicinity of the quantum-mechanical critical field, and the spectral tip structure for an electron in state n?1 is viewed in this high-field regime.

D. White

1978-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

275

table14.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections (current dollars per thousand cubic feet) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 AEO 1982 4.32 5.47 6.67 7.51 8.04 8.57 AEO 1983 2.93 3.11 3.46 3.93 4.56 5.26 12.74 AEO 1984 2.77 2.90 3.21 3.63 4.13 4.79 9.33 AEO 1985 2.60 2.61 2.66 2.71 2.94 3.35 3.85 4.46 5.10 5.83 6.67 AEO 1986 1.73 1.96 2.29 2.54 2.81 3.15 3.73 4.34 5.06 5.90 6.79 7.70 8.62 9.68 10.80 AEO 1987 1.83 1.95 2.11 2.28 2.49 2.72 3.08 3.51 4.07 7.54 AEO 1989* 1.62 1.70 1.91 2.13 2.58 3.04 3.48 3.93 4.76 5.23 5.80 6.43 6.98 AEO 1990 1.78 1.88 2.93 5.36 AEO 1991 1.77 1.90 2.11 2.30 2.42 2.51 2.60 2.74 2.91 3.29 3.75 4.31 5.07 5.77 6.45 AEO 1992 1.69 1.85 2.03 2.15 2.35 2.51 2.74 3.01 3.40 3.81 4.24 4.74 5.25 5.78 AEO 1993 1.85 1.94 2.09 2.30 2.44 2.60 2.85 3.12 3.47 3.84 4.31 4.81 5.28

276

Code Tables | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

System NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms Code Tables Code Tables U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards...

277

Renewable Energy Financial Instruments Guidance Tool (REFINe) | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Renewable Energy Financial Instruments Guidance Tool (REFINe) Renewable Energy Financial Instruments Guidance Tool (REFINe) Jump to: navigation, search Tool Summary LAUNCH TOOL Name: Renewable Energy Financial Instruments Guidance Tool (REFINe) Focus Area: Renewable Energy Topics: Policy Impacts Website: web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTENERGY2/0,,contentMDK:2298 Equivalent URI: cleanenergysolutions.org/content/renewable-energy-financial-instrument Language: English Policies: "Deployment Programs,Financial Incentives" is not in the list of possible values (Deployment Programs, Financial Incentives, Regulations) for this property. DeploymentPrograms: Training & Education Renewable Energy Financial Instruments Guidance Tool (REFINe) aims to assist policy in identifying appropriate financial instruments to scale-up

278

New Process for Grain Refinement of Aluminum. Final Report  

SciTech Connect

A new method of grain refining aluminum involving in-situ formation of boride nuclei in molten aluminum just prior to casting has been developed in the subject DOE program over the last thirty months by a team consisting of JDC, Inc., Alcoa Technical Center, GRAS, Inc., Touchstone Labs, and GKS Engineering Services. The Manufacturing process to make boron trichloride for grain refining is much simpler than preparing conventional grain refiners, with attendant environmental, capital, and energy savings. The manufacture of boride grain refining nuclei using the fy-Gem process avoids clusters, salt and oxide inclusions that cause quality problems in aluminum today.

Dr. Joseph A. Megy

2000-09-22T23:59:59.000Z

279

ITP Petroleum Refining: Technology Roadmap for the Petroleum...  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Technology Roadmap for the Petroleum Industry ITP Petroleum Refining: Technology Roadmap for the Petroleum Industry petroleumroadmap.pdf More Documents & Publications ITP Aluminum:...

280

,"U.S. Total Refiner Petroleum Product Prices"  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

NUSDPG","EMAEPPRLPWGNUSDPG","EMAEPPRHPWGNUSDPG" "Date","U.S. Total Gasoline WholesaleResale Price by Refiners (Dollars per Gallon)","U.S. Aviation Gasoline Wholesale...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

MECS Fuel Oil Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

: Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas : Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas Year Distillate Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 185 148 1224 3.4% 1994 152 125 1020 3.1% Residual Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 505 290 1577 16.7% 1994 441 241 1249 19.8% Natural Gas (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 4656 2702 5233 77.2% 1994 6141 4435 6758 73.4% Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, 1985 and 1994 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Surveys. Table 2: Establishments That Actually Switched Between Natural Gas and Residual Fuel Oil Type of Switch Number of Establishments in Population Number That Use Original Fuel Percentage That Use Original Fuel Number That Can Switch to Another Fuel Percentage That Can Switch to Another Fuel Number That Actually Made a Switch Percentage That Actually Made a Switch

282

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Turbines The Gas Turbine Handbook The Gas Turbine Handbook TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Updated Author Contact Information Introduction - Rich Dennis, Turbines Technology Manager 1.1 Simple and Combined Cycles - Claire Soares 1.1-1 Introduction 1.1-2 Applications 1.1-3 Applications versatility 1.1-4 The History of the Gas Turbine 1.1-5 Gas Turbine, Major Components, Modules, and systems 1.1-6 Design development with Gas Turbines 1.1-7 Gas Turbine Performance 1.1-8 Combined Cycles 1.1-9 Notes 1.2 Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) - Massod Ramezan and Gary Stiegel 1.2-1 Introduction 1.2-2 The Gasification Process 1.2-3 IGCC Systems 1.2-4 Gasifier Improvements 1.2-5 Gas Separation Improvements 1.2-6 Conclusions 1.2-7 Notes 1.2.1 Different Types of Gasifiers and Their Integration with Gas Turbines - Jeffrey Phillips

283

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - chapter Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Chapter Tables Chapter Tables Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 Chapter Tables Table 1. Estimated fuel economy for light-duty vehicles, based on proposed CAFE standards, 2010-2015 Table 2. State appliance efficiency standards and potential future actions Table 3. State renewable portfolio standards Table 4. Key analyses from "issues in Focus" in recent AEOs Table 5. Liquid fuels production in three cases, 2007 and 2030 Table 6. Assumptions used in comparing conventional and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles Table 7. Conventional vehicle and plug-in hybrid system component costs for mid-size vehicles at volume production Table 8. Technically recoverable resources of crude oil and natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf, as of January 1, 2007

284

MECS 1991 Publications and Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Figure showing the Largest Energy Consumers in the Manufacturing Sector You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1991 (file size 17.2 MB) pages:566 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 380,153 bytes) pages: 33, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector: An Overview Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector, 1991 Manufacturing Capability To Switch Fuels Appendices Appendix A. Detailed Tables Appendix B. Survey Design, Implementation, and Estimates (file size 141,211 bytes) pages: 22. Appendix C. Quality of the Data (file size 135,511 bytes) pages: 8.

285

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

............................................... 12 Water-Source Heat Pump Performance ............................ 18 Air-Source Heat Pump OF PERFORMANCE OF WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMP .............................. ................. 23 FIGURE 2. NODAL. MONTHLY HEAT GAIN/LOSS FACTORS ........................... 5 TABLE 2. BASE TEMPERATURES

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

286

TABLE30.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

30. Refinery Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Districts, July 2004 Crude Oil ......

287

TABLE17.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7. Refinery Net Production of Finished Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Districts, January 1998 Liquefied Refinery Gases ... 576 -7...

288

TABLE18.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8. Refinery Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Districts, January 1998 Crude Oil ......

289

TABLE16.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

6. Refinery Input of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Districts, January 1998 Crude Oil ......

290

11 California Petroleum Supply, Transportation, Refining and Marketing Trends  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

11 California Petroleum Supply, Transportation, Refining and Marketing Trends Chapter 2 CALIFORNIA PETROLEUM SUPPLY, TRANSPORTATION, REFINING AND MARKETING TRENDS INTRODUCTION California is an integral part of the world oil market as a world-scale petroleum consumer. Historically, about 50 percent of this petroleum

291

fCourse: Learn to Swim Level 5: Stroke Refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

fCourse: Learn to Swim Level 5: Stroke Refinement Purpose To further learn how to coordinate and refine strokes Prerequisites Valid American Red Cross Learn-to-Swim Level 4: Fundamental Aquatic Skills Shallow-angle dive from the side then glide and begin a front stroke Tuck and pike surface dives, submerge

Hemmers, Oliver

292

On Adaptive Mesh Refinement for Atmospheric Pollution Models  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

On Adaptive Mesh Refinement for Atmospheric Pollution Models Emil M. Constantinescu and Adrian Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005 #12;On Adaptive Mesh Refinement for Atmospheric Pollution Models 799 res- olution system for modeling regional air pollution based on the chemical transport model STEM

Sandu, Adrian

293

Refining Landscape Change Models through Outlier Analysis in the  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Refining Landscape Change Models through Outlier Analysis in the Muskegon Watershed of Michigan significantly to the state economy, accounting for nearly 20% of its economic output (Michigan Land Use, 1965; Lee, 1973; Wegener, 1994), and model refinement/advancement, in large part due to advances

Walker, Robert T.

294

Refined BPS state counting from Nekrasov's formula and Macdonald functions  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

It has been argued that the Nekrasov's partition function gives the generating function of refined BPS state counting in the compactification of M theory on local Calabi-Yau spaces. We show that a refined version of the topological vertex we proposed before (hep-th/0502061) is a building block of the Nekrasov's partition function with two equivariant parameters. Compared with another refined topological vertex by Iqbal-Kozcaz-Vafa (hep-th/0701156), our refined vertex is expressed entirely in terms of the specialization of the Macdonald symmetric functions which is related to the equivariant character of the Hilbert scheme of points on C^2. We provide diagrammatic rules for computing the partition function from the web diagrams appearing in geometric engineering of Yang-Mills theory with eight supercharges. Our refined vertex has a simple transformation law under the flop operation of the diagram, which suggests that homological invariants of the Hopf link are related to the Macdonald functions.

Hidetoshi Awata; Hiroaki Kanno

2009-03-10T23:59:59.000Z

295

The response of mechanical and chemical pulps to refining  

SciTech Connect

This paper reports on theoretical equations describing the flow of pulp in refiners were used to analyze the experimental results obtained in a series of pilot plant trials. Western red cedar and loblolly pine wood chips were refined in 1-3 stages at rotational speeds of 1200 and 1800 rpm to produce thermomechanical pulps (TMP). Also, sulfate semibleached and low-yield sulfite pulps were refined at low (5%), medium (12%), and high (25%) consistency. The results indicate that the number of refining stages did not affect mechanical pulp quality. At a given specific energy, increasing the rotational speed increased the specific energy per impact and decreased the total number of impacts, resulting in a faster rate of fines generation for mechanical pulps. For chemical pulps higher pulp consistency produced gentler refining and yielded a higher rate of freeness decrease.

Miles, K.B.; Karnis, A. (Pulp and Paper Research Inst. of Canada, 570 St. John's Rd., Pointe Claire, Quebec H9R 3J9 (CA))

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

296

Steel refining with an electrochemical cell  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

Apparatus for processing a metallic fluid containing iron oxide, container for a molten metal including an electrically conductive refractory disposed for contact with the molten metal which contains iron oxide, an electrolyte in the form of a basic slag on top of the molten metal, an electrode in the container in contact with the slag electrically separated from the refractory, and means for establishing a voltage across the refractory and the electrode to reduce iron oxide to iron at the surface of the refractory in contact with the iron oxide containing fluid. A process is disclosed for refining an iron product containing not more than about 10% by weight oxygen and not more than about 10% by weight sulfur, comprising providing an electrolyte of a slag containing one or more of calcium oxide, magnesium oxide, silica or alumina, providing a cathode of the iron product in contact with the electrolyte, providing an anode in contact with the electrolyte electrically separated from the cathode, and operating an electrochemical cell formed by the anode, the cathode and the electrolyte to separate oxygen or sulfur present in the iron product therefrom.

Blander, Milton (Palos Park, IL); Cook, Glenn M. (Naperville, IL)

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

297

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (2005-2035) Tables (2005-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 Reference Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix A. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

298

Table Definitions, Sources, and Explanatory Notes  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Residual Fuel Prices by Sales Type Residual Fuel Prices by Sales Type Definitions Key Terms Definition Gas Plant Operator Any firm, including a gas plant owner, which operates a gas plant and keeps the gas plant records. A gas plant is a facility in which natural gas liquids are separated from natural gas or in which natural gas liquids are fractionated or otherwise separated into natural gas liquid products or both. For the purposes of this survey, gas plant operator data are contained in the refiner categories. Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PADD): PADD 1 (East Coast): PADD 1A (New England): Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont. PADD 1B (Central Atlantic): Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania.

299

Life Cycle Carbon Footprint of Re-Refined versus Base Oil That Is Not Re-Refined  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The study showed that global warming potential was lower for all five re-refining techniques considered compared to the production of base oil in standard refineries. ... Safety-Kleen, the largest used oil re-refiner in North America, collects and re-refines used oil into approximately 100,000,000 gallons of base oil per year. ... Figure 4 presents the re-refined carbon footprint-based oil GHG emissions for re-refinery system yields of 50% (equivalent to two gallons of use over a gallon of base oils lifetime; 50% burden from virgin base oil input) to 100% (infinite re-refining; no burden from virgin base oil input). ...

Lisa N. Grice; Carolyn E. Nobel; Lin Longshore; Ramsay Huntley; Ashley L. DeVierno

2013-10-25T23:59:59.000Z

300

Changing System Interfaces Consistently: a New Refinement Strategy for CSP B  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Changing System Interfaces Consistently: a New Refinement Strategy for CSP B Steve Schneider refinement in the context of CSP B. Our motivation to include this notion of refinement within the CSP B to change the events of a CSP process and the B machines when refining a system. Notions of refinement based

Doran, Simon J.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

10 10 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

302

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

09 09 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

303

Nature Bulletin Table of Contents  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Table of Contents: Table of Contents: Here is our table of contents for the Forset Preserve District of Cook Country Nature Bulletins. To search, go to the Natuere Bulletin's Search Engine and type in your topic. You can also use your browser's "FIND" command to search the 750+ article titles here for a specific subject! Fish Smother Under Ice Coyotes in Cook County Tough Times for the Muskrats Wild Geese and Ducks Fly North Squirrels Spring Frogs Snapping Turtles A Phenomenal Spring Good People Do Not Pick Wildflowers Fire is the Enemy of Field and Forest Crows Earthworms Bees Crayfish Floods Handaxes and Knives in the Forest Preserves Ant Sanctuary Conservation Mosquitoes More About Mosquitoes Fishing in the Forest Preserve Our River Grasshoppers Chiggers Ticks Poison Ivy Fireflies

304

COST AND QUALITY TABLES 95  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 Tables 5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts The annual publication Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Utility Plants (C&Q) will no longer be pub- lished by the EIA. The tables presented in this docu- ment are intended to replace that annual publication. Questions regarding the availability of these data should be directed to: Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division

305

MTS Table Top Load frame  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

MTS Table Top Load frame MTS Table Top Load frame The Non-destructive Evaluation group operates an MTS Table Top Load frame for ultimate strength and life cycle testing of various ceramic, ceramic-matrix (FGI), carbon, carbon fiber, cermet (CMC) and metal alloy engineering samples. The load frame is a servo-hydraulic type designed to function in a closed loop configuration under computer control. The system can perform non-cyclic, tension, compression and flexure testing and cyclic fatigue tests. The system is comprised of two parts: * The Load Frame and * The Control System. Load Frame The Load Frame (figure 1) is a cross-head assembly which includes a single moving grip, a stationary grip and LVDT position sensor. It can generate up to 25 kN (5.5 kip) of force in the sample under test and can

306

,"Weekly Refiner Net Production"  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Refiner Net Production" Refiner Net Production" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description","# Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Weekly Refiner Net Production",21,"Weekly","12/13/2013","6/4/2010" ,"Release Date:","12/18/2013" ,"Next Release Date:","12/27/2013" ,"Excel File Name:","pet_pnp_wprodr_s1_w.xls" ,"Available from Web Page:","http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_wprodr_s1_w.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, Contact:","infoctr@eia.gov" ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"12/18/2013 10:39:21 AM"

307

CBECS 1992 - Building Characteristics, Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 The following 70 tables present extensive cross-tabulations of commercial buildings characteristics. These data are from the Buildings Characteristics Survey portion of the 1992 CBECS. The "Quick-Reference Guide," indicates the major topics of each table. Directions for calculating an approximate relative standard error (RSE) for each estimate in the tables are presented in Figure A1, "Use of RSE Row and Column Factor." The Glossary contains the definitions of the terms used in the tables. See the preceding "At A Glance" section for highlights of the detailed tables. Table Organization

308

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 1 to 116 Complete set of Supplemental Tables Complete set of Supplemental Tables. Need help, please contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central

309

Studies of the refining of crude cottonseed oil and its solutions in commercial hexane  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

with Different Concentrations of Caustic Soda................ 55 17. Refining of Diluted Cottonseed Oil-Hexane Fiscellas with 24? Re' Caustic Soda................................. 5^ Page LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) 18. Refining of FFOHR Cottonseed Oil.................................................... .65 21. Refining Cottonseed Oil Kiscellas with Ammonia Gas Followed by Caustic Re-refining......................... 67 22. Ammonium Hydroxide Refining of Cottonseed Oil-Hexane Kiscellas and Re-refining with 2.5$ of 20? Be' Caustic Soda...

Zeitoun, Mohamed Ali

2013-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

310

Developing Refined Products Storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Refined Products Storage in the Strategic Petroleum Refined Products Storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve Developing Refined Products Storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve May 12, 2009 - 3:14pm Addthis Statement of David F. Johnson, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Petroleum Reserves before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am pleased to be here today to discuss the issue of developing refined products storage in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As you know, the SPR was established by Congress through passage of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act in 1975 in response to the Arab oil embargoes. The primary policy of the U.S. petroleum stockpiling program has been to store crude oil. The SPR has served to protect our Nation from crude oil supply interruptions for over three

311

Secretary Bodman Tours Refinery and Calls for More Domestic Refining  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Tours Refinery and Calls for More Domestic Tours Refinery and Calls for More Domestic Refining Capacity Secretary Bodman Tours Refinery and Calls for More Domestic Refining Capacity May 18, 2006 - 10:43am Addthis Highlights President Bush's Four-Point Plan to Combat High Energy Prices PORT ARTHUR, TX - Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today renewed the call for expanded oil refining capacity in the United States and discussed additional steps the Department of Energy (DOE) is taking to prepare for the upcoming hurricane season. Secretary Bodman made the statements after touring the Motiva Refinery in Port Arthur, Texas. "We need a more robust energy sector; and one way to do that is to strengthen and expand our domestic oil refining capacity. We're hopeful that Motiva will continue to work to expand their capacity to 600,000

312

,"U.S. Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil"  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","U.S. Refiner...

313

Wind Simulation Refinement: Some New Challenges for Particle Methods  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

We present two new challenges related to the stochastic downscaling method (SDM) that we applied to wind simulation refinement in Bernardin et al. (Stoch....Particle in Cell methods. Then we turn to the uniform d...

C. Chauvin; F. Bernardin; M. Bossy

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

314

Gulf Coast refiners gain access to more California crudes  

SciTech Connect

Refiners east of the Rockies, particularly Gulf Coast refiners, have gained access to easter and central California crudes with the opening of Celeron Corp.'s All American Pipeline (AAPL). Currently, AAPL is carrying a blend of California crudes with properties similar to Alaskan North Slope (ANS). Although the blend is moderate gravity and sulfur content, it is comprised of crudes from several fields in California that display wide variations in quality. Future deliveries east from California will be from regions with even more extremes of quality. To familiarize refiners with the crudes that will become available, some of the properties of these California crudes are discussed, along with some of the problems refiners may encounter in processing these materials.

Vautrain, J.H.; Sanderson, W.J.

1988-07-11T23:59:59.000Z

315

,"U.S. Total Refiner Acquisition Cost of Crude Oil"  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Crude Oil" "Sourcekey","R00003","R12003","R13003" "Date","U.S. Crude Oil Composite Acquisition Cost by Refiners (Dollars per Barrel)","U.S. Crude Oil Domestic...

316

Error estimation and adaptive mesh refinement for aerodynamic flows  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Error estimation and adaptive mesh refinement for aerodynamic flows Ralf Hartmann1 and Paul Houston2 1 Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology DLR (German Aerospace Center) Lilienthalplatz 7

Hartmann, Ralf

317

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

S O N D 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1995 Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes Retail < or 1% Wholesale < or 1% Retail > 1% Wholesale > 1% 7. U.S. Refiner Residual Fuel Oil Prices and...

318

May 28 Webinar to Focus on Tribal Energy Project Refinement  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Register for the Tribal Renewable Energy Project Refinement webinar, which will be held on Wednesday, May 28, 2014, from 11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Mountain time.

319

Efficient Parallel Refinement for Hierarchical Radiosity on a DSM computer  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Efficient Parallel Refinement for Hierarchical Radiosity on a DSM computer François X. Sillion memory (DSM) parallel architecture. Our task definition is based on a very fine grain decompo- sition

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

320

LCA of a spent lube oil Re-refining process  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Although re-refining of spent lubricating oils (used oils) has been practiced with varying technical and commercial success for over the past 50 years, a sustainable processing technology has yet to become widely accepted. Poor on-stream efficiency, inconsistent product quality, and careless management of feedstock contaminants and byproducts have often resulted in widespread environmental problems and poor economics. Environmentally-conscious design of processes and products is increasingly viewed as an integral strategy in the sustainable development of new refining and chemical processes. Life cycle assessment is becoming the preferred methodology for comparing the environmental impacts of competing processes. A life cycle analyses of a promising new re-refining technology, the HyLubeTM process, has been undertaken to quantify the intrinsic benefits of HyLube re-refining over the current practice of recovering used oils for fuel value

Tom N. Kalnes; David R. Shonnard; Andreas Schuppel

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

The crisis in Kuwait and U. S. refiners' travail  

SciTech Connect

The August 2, 1990, invasion of Kuwait on the part of Iraq has set in motion an accelerated domino affect in US fuels markets. The impact on US refiners has been generally negative, both in terms of margins and perceptions of same. This issue of Energy Detente (ED) updates a few directional indicators that affect refining margins and considers longer-term refining capacity requirements in the US. ED feels the invasion of Kuwait might force oil companies to allocate more talent, time, and financial resources to public affairs. This issue also contains the following: (1) The ED Refining Netback Data Series for the US Gulf and West Coasts, Rotterdam, and Singapore as of Aug. 24, 1990; and (2) the ED Fuel Price/Tax Series for countries of the Eastern Hemisphere Aug. 1990 edition. 4 figs., 5 tabs.

Not Available

1990-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

322

CATALYTIC CONVERSION OF SOLVENT REFINED COAL TO LIQUID PRODUCTS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

I. Solvent Refined Coal II. Catalysts III. Purpose andSondreal, E.A. , "Viscosity of Coal Liquids - The Effect ofAnthraxylon - Kinetics of Coal Hydrogenation," Ind. and Eng.

Tanner, K.I.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

323

Polygons in Buildings and their Refined Side Lengths  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1999. [Bro] K. Brown, Buildings, Springer, 1989. [BuBI] D.AMS, 2001. [D] M. Davis, Buildings are CAT(0), in Geometryat Springerlink.com POLYGONS IN BUILDINGS AND THEIR REFINED

Kapovich, Michael; Leeb, Bernhard; Millson, John J.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

324

Hydrogen and Fuel Cells - Refining the Message Initiating a National Dialogue and Educational Agenda  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Refining the Message Initiating aApril 1, 2005 Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Refining the Messagethe communication problem. Hydrogen and fuel cells have now

Eggert, Anthony; Kurani, Kenneth S; Turrentine, Tom; Ogden, Joan M; Sperling, Dan; Winston, Emily

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

325

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents Section 1 - General Statement Section 2 - Management's Responsibility for Preventing Fraud Section 3 - Consequences for Fraudulent Acts Section 4 - Procedures for Reporting Fraud Section 5 - Procedures for the Investigation of Alleged Fraud Section 6 - Protection Under

Shihadeh, Alan

326

CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

-Specific Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) Section 8 Employee Training Section 9 Inspections and Exposure1 CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents Section 1 Safety Program Key Personnel Section 2 Laboratory Protective Equipment (PPE) Assessment Section 18 Hazard Assessment Information and PPE Selection Information

Braun, Paul

327

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2009-2013 (million cubic feet) 2009 Total 259,848 327,105 586,953 1,878,928 606,403 2,485,331...

328

PARENT HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

PARENT HANDBOOK 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS The Parent's Role 3 Academics 7 Academic Advising 7 Academic Services 26 Athletics, Physical Education and Recreation 28 Campus Resources and Student Services 30 to seeing you in person and connecting with you online! PARENT HANDBOOK THEPARENT'SROLE PARENT HANDBOOK 3

Adali, Tulay

329

Automatic Construction of Diagnostic Tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......more usual, at least in microbiology.) Keys and diagnostic tables...Mechanization and Data Handling in Microbiology, Society for Applied Bacteriology...by A. Baillie and R. J. Gilbert, London: Academic Press...cultures, Canadian Journal of Microbiology, Vol. 14, pp. 271-279......

W. R. Willcox; S. P. Lapage

1972-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

330

An optimal filtering algorithm for table constraints  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Filtering algorithms for table constraints are constraint-based, which means that the propagation queue only contains information on the constraints that must be reconsidered. This paper proposes four efficient value-based algorithms for table constraints, ...

Jean-Baptiste Mairy; Pascal Van Hentenryck; Yves Deville

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

331

Table Name query? | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Name query? Home > Groups > Databus Is there an API feature which returns the names of tables? Submitted by Hopcroft on 28 October, 2013 - 15:37 1 answer Points: 0 if you are...

332

TABLE29.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

9. Refinery Net Production of Finished Petroleum Products by PAD and Refining Districts, July 2004 Liquefied Refinery Gases ... 2,082 70...

333

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Energy Information Administration, Form FEA-P110-M-1, "Refiners' Monthly Cost Allocation Report," January 1978 through June 1978; Form ERA-49, "Domestic Crude Oil Entitlements...

334

Chemistry Department Assessment Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

0 Chemistry Department Assessment May, 2006 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 1 Prelude 1 Mission Statement and Learning Goals 1 Facilities 2 Staffing 3 Students: Chemistry Majors and Student Taking Service Courses Table: 1997-2005 graduates profile Table: GRE Score for Chemistry Majors, 1993

Bogaerts, Steven

335

GRAIN REFINEMENT OF PERMANENT MOLD CAST COPPER BASE ALLOYS  

SciTech Connect

Grain refinement behavior of copper alloys cast in permanent molds was investigated. This is one of the least studied subjects in copper alloy castings. Grain refinement is not widely practiced for leaded copper alloys cast in sand molds. Aluminum bronzes and high strength yellow brasses, cast in sand and permanent molds, were usually fine grained due to the presence of more than 2% iron. Grain refinement of the most common permanent mold casting alloys, leaded yellow brass and its lead-free replacement EnviroBrass III, is not universally accepted due to the perceived problem of hard spots in finished castings and for the same reason these alloys contain very low amounts of iron. The yellow brasses and Cu-Si alloys are gaining popularity in North America due to their low lead content and amenability for permanent mold casting. These alloys are prone to hot tearing in permanent mold casting. Grain refinement is one of the solutions for reducing this problem. However, to use this technique it is necessary to understand the mechanism of grain refinement and other issues involved in the process. The following issues were studied during this three year project funded by the US Department of Energy and the copper casting industry: (1) Effect of alloying additions on the grain size of Cu-Zn alloys and their interaction with grain refiners; (2) Effect of two grain refining elements, boron and zirconium, on the grain size of four copper alloys, yellow brass, EnviroBrass II, silicon brass and silicon bronze and the duration of their effect (fading); (3) Prediction of grain refinement using cooling curve analysis and use of this method as an on-line quality control tool; (4) Hard spot formation in yellow brass and EnviroBrass due to grain refinement; (5) Corrosion resistance of the grain refined alloys; (6) Transfer the technology to permanent mold casting foundries; It was found that alloying elements such as tin and zinc do not change the grain size of Cu-Zn alloys. Aluminum promoted b phase formation and modified the grain structure from dendritic to equiaxed. Lead or bismuth reduces the size of grains, but not change the morphology of the structure in Cu-Zn alloys. The grain size of the Cu-Zn-alloy can be reduced from 3000 mm to 300 mm after the addition of aluminum and lead. Similar effects were observed in EnviroBrass III after the addition of aluminum and bismuth. Boron refined the structure of yellow brasses in the presence of iron. At least 50 ppm of iron and 3 ppm of boron are necessary to cause grain refinement in these alloys. Precipitation of iron from the melt is identified as the cause of grain refinement. Boron initiates the precipitation of iron which could not be explained at this time. On the other hand zirconium causes some reduction in grain size in all four alloys investigated. The critical limit for the zirconium was found to be around 100 ppm below which not much refinement could be observed. The mechanism of grain refinement in the presence of zirconium could not be explained. Grain refinement by boron and iron can remain over a long period of time, at least for 72 hours of holding or after remelting few times. It is necessary to have the iron and boron contents above the critical limits mentioned earlier. On the other hand, refinement by zirconium is lost quite rapidly, some times within one hour of holding, mostly due to the loss of zirconium, most probably by oxidation, from the melt. In all the cases it is possible to revive the refinement by adding more of the appropriate refining element. Cooling curve analysis (thermal analysis) can be used successfully to predict the grain refinement in yellow brasses. The precipitation of iron in the liquid metal causes the metal to solidify without undercooling. Absence of this reaction, as indicated by the time-temperature (t-T) and its first derivative (dt/dT) curves, proved to be an indicator of refinement. The viability of the technique as an on-line quality control tool was proved in two foundries. The method can also correctly predict the onset of fading. Th

M. SADAYAPPAN, J.P. THOMSON, M.ELBOUJDAINI, G. PING GU, M. SAHOO

2004-04-29T23:59:59.000Z

336

U.S. Refiner Petroleum Product Prices  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Area: U.S. East Coast (PADD 1) New England (PADD 1A) Connecticut Maine Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont Central Atlantic (PADD 1B) Delaware District of Columbia Maryland New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Lower Atlantic (PADD 1C) Florida Georgia North Carolina South Carolina Virginia West Virginia Midwest (PADD 2) Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma South Dakota Tennessee Wisconsin Gulf Coast (PADD 3) Alabama Arkansas Louisiana Mississippi New Mexico Texas Rocky Mountain (PADD 4) Colorado Idaho Montana Utah Wyoming West Coast (PADD 5) Alaska Arizona California Hawaii Nevada Oregon Washington Period: Monthly Annual

337

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

25 25 Table 11 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:10:53 PM Table 11. Underground natural gas storage - storage fields other than salt caverns, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,900 2,976 76 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,856 2,563 -293 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,781 2,822 41 2011 January 4,166 2,131 6,298 -63 -2.9 27 780 753 February 4,166 1,597 5,763 -10 -0.6 51 586 535 March 4,165 1,426 5,591 -114 -7.4 117 288 172

338

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

1 1 Table 8 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:07:39 PM Table 8. Underground natural gas storage - all operators, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total a Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals b 2008 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,340 3,374 34 2009 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,315 2,966 -349 2010 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,291 3,274 -17 2011 January 4,303 2,306 6,609 2 0.1 50 849 799 February 4,302 1,722 6,024 39 2.3 82 666 584 March 4,302 1,577 5,879 -75 -4.6 168 314 146 April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100

339

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Action Codes Table Home > About Us > Our Programs > Nuclear Security > Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System > NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms > Code Tables > Action Codes Table

340

Adaptive mesh refinement for shocks and material interfaces  

SciTech Connect

There are three kinds of adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) in structured meshes. Block-based AMR sometimes over refines meshes. Cell-based AMR treats cells cell by cell and thus loses the advantage of the nature of structured meshes. Patch-based AMR is intended to combine advantages of block- and cell-based AMR, i.e., the nature of structured meshes and sharp regions of refinement. But, patch-based AMR has its own difficulties. For example, patch-based AMR typically cannot preserve symmetries of physics problems. In this paper, we will present an approach for a patch-based AMR for hydrodynamics simulations. The approach consists of clustering, symmetry preserving, mesh continuity, flux correction, communications, management of patches, and load balance. The special features of this patch-based AMR include symmetry preserving, efficiency of refinement across shock fronts and material interfaces, special implementation of flux correction, and patch management in parallel computing environments. To demonstrate the capability of the AMR framework, we will show both two- and three-dimensional hydrodynamics simulations with many levels of refinement.

Dai, William Wenlong [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

Contaminants in Used Lubricating Oils and Their Fate during Distillation/Hydrotreatment Re-Refining  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Contaminants in Used Lubricating Oils and Their Fate during Distillation/Hydrotreatment Re-Refining ...

Dennis W. Brinkman; John R. Dickson

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

342

Description of Energy Intensity Tables (12)  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables 3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables There are 12 data tables used as references for this report. Specifically, these tables are categorized as tables 1 and 2 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1985, 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1985 and the three subsequent years (1988, 1991, and 1994) tables 3 and 4 present 1988, 1991, and 1994 energy-intensity ratios that have been adjusted to the mix of products shipped from manufacturing establishments in 1985 tables 5 and 6 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1988 and the two subsequent

343

Sandia National Labs: PCNSC: IBA Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Home Home About Us Departments Radiation, Nano Materials, & Interface Sciences > Radiation & Solid Interactions > Nanomaterials Sciences > Surface & Interface Sciences Semiconductor & Optical Sciences Energy Sciences Small Science Cluster Business Office News Partnering Research Ion Beam Analysis (IBA) Periodic Table (HTML) IBA Table (HTML) | IBA Table (135KB GIF) | IBA Table (1.2MB PDF) | IBA Table (33MB TIF) | Heavy Ion Backscattering Spectrometry (HIBS) | Virtual Lab Tour (6MB) The purpose of this table is to quickly give the visitor to this site information on the sensitivity, depth of analysis and depth resolution of most of the modern ion beam analysis techniques in a single easy to use format: a periodic table. Note that you can click on each panel of this

344

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO2006) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2006, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2006 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2006 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2004-2006 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

345

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 (AEO2007) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2005 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2007, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2007 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and eighteen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2007 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Projections for 2006 and 2007 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term projections and are based on more current information than the AEO.

346

Refining Crude Oil - Energy Explained, Your Guide To Understanding Energy -  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Oil and Petroleum Products > Refining Crude Oil Oil and Petroleum Products > Refining Crude Oil Energy Explained - Home What Is Energy? Forms of Energy Sources of Energy Laws of Energy Units and Calculators Energy Conversion Calculators British Thermal Units (Btu) Degree-Days U.S. Energy Facts State and U.S. Territory Data Use of Energy In Industry For Transportation In Homes In Commercial Buildings Efficiency and Conservation Energy and the Environment Greenhouse Gases Effect on the Climate Where Emissions Come From Outlook for Future Emissions Recycling and Energy Nonrenewable Sources Oil and Petroleum Products Refining Crude Oil Where Our Oil Comes From Imports and Exports Offshore Oil and Gas Use of Oil Prices and Outlook Oil and the Environment Gasoline Where Our Gasoline Comes From Use of Gasoline Prices and Outlook

347

Integration Strategy of Gasification Technology:? A Gateway to Future Refining  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The historical evidence of the operation of a coal gasification plant goes as far back in time as 1878.1 The United State's first power plant based on coal gasification technology was installed in 1980.2 The concept of gasification has begun to attract much attention from the refining industry because of stringent environmental regulations on transportation fuel, slashing demands for fuel oils, and uncertainty in the availability of good crude oils. ... Therefore, it is a challenging task for refining industries to economically integrate gasification technology, and this is the major theme of the paper. ... Gasification is superior to many of the available power production and waste disposal technologies by addressing various issues together regarding environmental emissions, maintaining quality of refining products, and waste management. ...

Jhuma Sadhukhan; X. X. Zhu

2002-02-09T23:59:59.000Z

348

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4-2030) 4-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Price Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Price Case Tables Low Price Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity Table 10. Electricity Trade Table 11. Petroleum Supply and Disposition Balance

349

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Economic Growth Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Economic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables Low Economic Growth Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

350

Chapter 1 - Refining Heavy Oil and Extra-heavy Oil  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The definitions of heavy oil, extra-heavy oil, and tar sand bitumen are inadequate insofar as the definitions rely upon a single physical property to define a complex feedstock. This chapter presents viable options to the antiquated definitions of the heavy feedstocks (heavy oil, extra-heavy oil, and tar sand bitumen) as well as an introduction to the various aspects of heavy feedstock refining in order for the reader to place each feedstock in the correct context of properties, behavior, and refining needs.

James G. Speight

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

351

Petroleum Refining Operations: Key Issues, Advances, and Opportunities  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

A typical petroleum industry supply chain is composed of an exploration phase at the wellhead, crude procurement and storage logistics, transportation to the refineries, refinery operations, and distribution and delivery of its products (Figure 1). ... This network is used to transport crude from wellhead to refinery for processing, to transport intermediates between multisite refining facilities, and to transport finished products from product storage tanks to distribution centers and finally to the customers. ... In common-carrier pipelines, however, several refineries located at different sites use the same trunk line for shipping refined petroleum products to downstream output terminals. ...

Nikisha K. Shah; Zukui Li; Marianthi G. Ierapetritou

2010-12-10T23:59:59.000Z

352

National oil companies' presence to hike US refining competition  

SciTech Connect

This paper reports that the downstream segment of the U.S. petroleum business is virtually certain to become more competitive because of the growing presence of national oil companies in the country's refining industry. That's a forecast by New York investment firm Kidder Peabody. It cites a plan by Mexico's Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex) to form a joint venture with Shell Oil Co. covering Shell's 225,000 b/d Deer Park, Tex., refinery as the latest example of national oil companies' movement into U.S. refining.

Not Available

1992-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

353

Prices of Refiner Kerosene Sales for Resale  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 View May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 View History U.S. 2.793 2.806 2.996 3.055 3.057 3.029 1983-2013 East Coast (PADD 1) 3.018 2.989 3.173 3.132 3.172 3.182 1983-2013 New England (PADD 1A) W - - W W NA 1983-2013 Connecticut W - - W W NA 1984-2013 Maine - - - - - - 1984-2013 Massachusetts - - - - - - 1984-2013 New Hampshire - - - - - - 1984-2013 Rhode Island - - - - - - 1984-2013 Vermont - - - - - - 1984-2013 Central Atlantic (PADD 1B) 2.952 2.985 3.173 3.096 3.146 3.140 1983-2013 Delaware - W W - W W 1984-2013 District of Columbia - - - - - - 1984-2013 Maryland W W W W W W 1984-2013 New Jersey W W W W W W 1984-2013 New York W W W W 3.328 3.258 1984-2013 Pennsylvania W W W W 3.408 W 1984-2013

354

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in B-100 Bone-equivalent plastic Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52740 1.450 85.9 0.05268 3.7365 0.1252 3.0420 3.4528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.435 7.435 7.443 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.803 5.803 1.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.535 4.535 2.543 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.521 3.521 5.080 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.008 3.008 8.173 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.256 2.256 2.401 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.115 2.115 3.319 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 5.287 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 8.408 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 1.376 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 1.866 1.913 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.940 0.000 0.000 1.940 4.016 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.973 0.000 0.000 1.974 5.037 × 10 2 1.40

355

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium monoxide Na 2 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.48404 2.270 148.8 0.07501 3.6943 0.1652 2.9793 4.1892 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.330 6.330 8.793 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.955 4.956 1.601 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.883 3.884 2.984 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.024 3.024 5.943 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.588 2.588 9.541 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.954 1.954 2.789 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.840 1.840 3.846 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.725 1.725 6.102 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.663 1.664 9.656 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.646 0.000 1.647 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.647 0.000 1.647 1.571 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.659 0.000 1.660 2.177 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.738 0.000 0.000 1.738 4.531 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.771 0.000 0.000 1.772 5.670 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

356

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Tissue-equivalent gas (Propane based) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55027 1.826 × 10 -3 59.5 0.09802 3.5159 1.5139 3.9916 9.3529 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.132 8.132 6.782 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.337 6.337 1.241 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.943 4.944 2.326 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.831 3.831 4.656 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.269 3.269 7.500 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.450 2.450 2.209 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.303 2.303 3.053 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.158 2.158 4.855 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.084 2.084 7.695 × 10 1 263. MeV 3.527 × 10 2 2.068 0.000 2.069 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.071 0.000 2.072 1.252 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.097 0.000 2.097 1.732 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.232 0.000 0.000 2.232 3.580 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.289 0.000 0.000 2.290

357

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead oxide (PbO) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.40323 9.530 766.7 0.19645 2.7299 0.0356 3.5456 6.2162 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.046 4.046 1.411 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.207 3.207 2.532 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.542 2.542 4.656 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.003 2.003 9.146 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.727 1.727 1.455 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.327 1.327 4.176 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.256 1.256 5.729 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.188 1.189 9.017 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.158 1.158 1.415 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.155 0.000 1.155 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.161 0.000 0.000 1.161 2.279 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.181 0.000 0.000 1.181 3.133 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.266 0.001 0.000 1.267 6.398 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.299 0.001 0.000 1.301 7.955 × 10 2 1.40

358

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Liquid argon (Ar) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 18 (Ar) 39.948 (1) 1.396 188.0 0.19559 3.0000 0.2000 3.0000 5.2146 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.687 5.687 9.833 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.461 4.461 1.786 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.502 3.502 3.321 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.731 2.731 6.598 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.340 2.340 1.058 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.084 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.669 1.670 4.250 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.570 1.570 6.732 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.518 1.519 1.063 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.508 0.000 1.508 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.509 0.000 1.510 1.725 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.526 0.000 0.000 1.526 2.385 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.610 0.000 0.000 1.610 4.934 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.644 0.000 0.000 1.645 6.163

359

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-13 (CF 3 Cl) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.47966 0.950 126.6 0.07238 3.5551 0.3659 3.2337 4.7483 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.416 6.416 8.659 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.019 5.019 1.578 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.930 3.930 2.945 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 5.870 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.615 2.615 9.430 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 2.760 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 3.809 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.745 1.745 6.041 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.685 1.685 9.551 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 1.553 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.151 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.762 0.000 0.000 1.763 4.473 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.596 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

360

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lutetium silicon oxide [Lu 2 SiO 5 ] Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42793 7.400 472.0 0.20623 3.0000 0.2732 3.0000 5.4394 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.679 4.679 1.209 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.692 3.693 2.181 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.916 2.916 4.029 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.287 2.287 7.953 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.968 1.968 1.270 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.503 1.503 3.666 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.421 1.422 5.038 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.344 1.344 7.944 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.308 1.308 1.248 × 10 2 242. MeV 3.316 × 10 2 1.304 1.304 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.309 0.000 0.000 1.309 2.014 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.329 2.773 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.416 5.684 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.449 0.001 0.000 1.450 7.080

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Boron oxide (B 2 O 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49839 1.812 99.6 0.11548 3.3832 0.1843 2.7379 3.6027 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.889 6.889 8.045 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.381 5.381 1.468 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.208 4.208 2.744 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.269 3.269 5.477 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.794 2.794 8.807 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.102 2.103 2.583 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 3.567 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.843 1.843 5.674 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.768 1.768 9.010 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 1.472 × 10 2 307. MeV 3.990 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.750 0.000 1.750 2.045 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.822 0.000 0.000 1.823 4.285 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.854 0.000 0.000 1.855 5.373 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

362

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Liquid H-note density shift (H 2 ) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 1 (H) 1.00794 (7) 7.080 × 10 -2 21.8 0.32969 3.0000 0.1641 1.9641 2.6783 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 16.508 16.508 3.316 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 12.812 12.812 6.097 × 10 -1 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 9.956 9.956 1.147 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 7.684 7.684 2.307 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 6.539 6.539 3.727 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 4.870 4.870 1.105 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 4.550 4.550 1.531 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 4.217 4.217 2.448 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 4.018 0.000 4.018 3.912 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 3.926 0.000 3.926 6.438 × 10 1 356. MeV 4.497 × 10 2 3.919 0.000 3.919 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 3.922 0.000 3.922 8.988 × 10 1 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 4.029 0.000 4.030 1.906 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 4.084 0.001

363

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Cortical bone (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52130 1.850 106.4 0.06198 3.5919 0.1161 3.0919 3.6488 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.142 7.142 7.765 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.581 5.581 1.417 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.366 4.366 2.646 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.393 3.393 5.281 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.900 2.901 8.489 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.179 2.179 2.489 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.044 2.044 3.440 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.475 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.830 1.830 8.700 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 1.422 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.812 0.000 1.812 1.976 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.888 0.000 0.000 1.889 4.138 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.922 0.000 0.000 1.923 5.187 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

364

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-13B1 (CF 3 Br) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.45665 1.500 210.5 0.03925 3.7194 0.3522 3.7554 5.3555 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.678 5.678 9.844 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.454 4.454 1.788 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.498 3.498 3.325 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.729 2.729 6.606 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.339 2.339 1.059 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.086 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.671 1.671 4.251 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.574 1.574 6.729 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.524 1.524 1.062 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.513 0.000 1.513 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.515 0.000 1.515 1.721 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.531 0.000 0.000 1.532 2.378 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.616 0.000 0.000 1.616 4.919 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.650 0.001 0.000 1.651 6.142 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

365

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium carbonate (Na 2 CO 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49062 2.532 125.0 0.08715 3.5638 0.1287 2.8591 3.7178 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.575 6.575 8.449 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.142 5.142 1.540 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.026 4.026 2.874 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.131 3.131 5.729 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.679 2.679 9.204 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 2.695 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.895 1.895 3.721 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.771 1.772 5.914 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.703 1.703 9.381 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 1.531 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.690 0.000 1.691 2.125 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.764 0.000 0.000 1.764 4.440 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.563 × 10 2 1.40

366

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Tungsten hexafluoride (WF 6 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42976 2.400 354.4 0.03658 3.5134 0.3020 4.2602 5.9881 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.928 4.928 1.143 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.880 3.880 2.067 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 3.828 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.393 2.393 7.574 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.056 2.056 1.211 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.565 1.565 3.509 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.479 1.479 4.827 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.396 1.396 7.623 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.353 1.353 1.200 × 10 2 253. MeV 3.431 × 10 2 1.346 0.000 1.346 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.349 0.000 0.000 1.349 1.942 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.367 0.000 0.000 1.367 2.679 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.451 0.001 0.000 1.452 5.516 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.485 0.001 0.000 1.486 6.877

367

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Standard rock Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.50000 2.650 136.4 0.08301 3.4120 0.0492 3.0549 3.7738 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.619 6.619 8.400 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.180 5.180 1.530 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.057 4.057 2.854 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.157 3.157 5.687 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.701 2.702 9.133 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.028 2.029 2.675 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.904 1.904 3.695 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.779 1.779 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.710 1.710 9.331 × 10 1 297. MeV 3.884 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 1.523 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.698 0.000 1.698 2.114 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.774 0.000 0.000 1.775 4.418 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.808 0.000 0.000 1.808 5.534 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

368

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Ceric sulfate dosimeter solution Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55279 1.030 76.7 0.07666 3.5607 0.2363 2.8769 3.5212 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.909 7.909 6.989 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.170 6.170 1.278 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.391 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.739 3.739 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.193 3.193 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.398 2.398 2.261 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.255 2.255 3.123 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.102 2.102 4.968 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 7.896 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.980 0.000 1.980 1.292 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.979 0.000 1.979 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.986 0.000 1.986 1.797 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.062 0.000 0.000 2.062 3.774 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.096 0.000 0.000 2.097 4.735 × 10

369

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Silicon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 14 (Si) 28.0855 (3) 2.329 173.0 0.14921 3.2546 0.2015 2.8716 4.4355 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.363 6.363 8.779 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.987 4.987 1.595 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.912 3.912 2.969 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.047 3.047 5.905 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.608 2.608 9.476 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.965 1.965 2.770 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.849 1.849 3.822 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.737 1.737 6.064 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.678 1.678 9.590 × 10 1 273. MeV 3.633 × 10 2 1.664 0.000 1.664 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.665 0.000 1.666 1.559 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.157 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.767 0.000 0.000 1.768 4.475 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.803 0.000 0.000 1.804 5.595 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

370

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyethylene terephthalate (Mylar) (C 10 H 8 O 4 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52037 1.400 78.7 0.12679 3.3076 0.1562 2.6507 3.3262 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.420 7.420 7.451 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.789 5.789 1.362 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.522 4.522 2.548 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.509 3.509 5.093 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.997 2.997 8.197 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.250 2.250 2.409 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.108 2.108 3.329 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.963 1.964 5.305 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.440 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 1.382 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.848 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.855 0.000 1.855 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.926 0.000 0.000 1.926 4.039 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.958 0.000 0.000 1.959

371

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Dichlorodiethyl ether C 4 Cl 2 H 8 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51744 1.220 103.3 0.06799 3.5250 0.1773 3.1586 4.0135 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.789 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.561 5.561 1.421 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.349 4.349 2.655 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.380 3.380 5.300 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.889 2.889 8.521 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.174 2.174 2.499 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.042 2.042 3.450 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.486 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.832 1.832 8.708 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 1.422 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.817 0.000 1.817 1.974 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.895 0.000 0.000 1.896 4.129 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.931 5.174 × 10

372

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 82 (Pb) 207.2 (1) 11.350 823.0 0.09359 3.1608 0.3776 3.8073 6.2018 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.823 3.823 1.524 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.054 3.054 2.705 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.436 2.436 4.927 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.928 1.928 9.600 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.666 1.666 1.521 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.283 1.283 4.338 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.215 1.215 5.943 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.151 1.152 9.339 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.124 1.124 1.463 × 10 2 226. MeV 3.145 × 10 2 1.122 0.000 1.123 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.130 0.000 0.000 1.131 2.352 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.151 0.000 0.000 1.152 3.228 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.237 0.001 0.000 1.238 6.572 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.270 0.001 0.000 1.272 8.165 × 10 2 1.40

373

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium iodide (NaI) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42697 3.667 452.0 0.12516 3.0398 0.1203 3.5920 6.0572 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.703 4.703 1.202 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.710 3.710 2.169 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.928 2.928 4.009 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.297 2.297 7.917 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 1.264 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.509 1.509 3.652 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.427 1.427 5.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.347 1.348 7.916 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.310 1.310 1.245 × 10 2 243. MeV 3.325 × 10 2 1.305 1.305 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.310 0.000 0.000 1.310 2.010 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.330 2.768 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.417 0.001 0.000 1.418 5.677 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.452 0.001 0.000 1.453 7.070 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

374

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyvinyl alcohol (C 2 H3-O-H) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54480 1.300 69.7 0.11178 3.3893 0.1401 2.6315 3.1115 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.891 7.891 6.999 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.153 6.153 1.280 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.804 4.804 2.396 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.726 3.726 4.793 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.181 3.181 7.717 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.383 2.384 2.270 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.231 2.232 3.140 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.076 2.076 5.007 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.986 1.986 7.974 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.950 0.000 1.950 1.307 × 10 2 324. MeV 4.161 × 10 2 1.949 0.000 1.949 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.955 0.000 1.955 1.820 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.026 0.000 0.000 2.026 3.830 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.059 0.000 0.000 2.059 4.809 × 10 2 1.40

375

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Cesium Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 55 (Cs)132.9054519 (2) 1.873 488.0 0.18233 2.8866 0.5473 3.5914 6.9135 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.464 4.464 1.277 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.532 3.532 2.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.794 2.794 4.224 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.195 2.195 8.315 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.890 1.890 1.325 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.444 1.444 3.820 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.366 1.366 5.248 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.291 1.291 8.274 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.257 1.257 1.300 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.254 1.254 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.261 0.000 0.000 1.261 2.096 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.284 0.000 0.000 1.285 2.882 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.378 0.001 0.000 1.380 5.881 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.417 7.311 × 10 2

376

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Propane (C 3 H 8 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.58962 1.868 × 10 -3 47.1 0.09916 3.5920 1.4339 3.8011 8.7939 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.969 8.969 6.137 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.982 6.982 1.125 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.441 5.441 2.109 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 4.212 4.213 4.228 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.592 3.592 6.815 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.688 2.688 2.010 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.525 2.526 2.780 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.365 2.365 4.424 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.281 2.281 7.018 × 10 1 267. MeV 3.577 × 10 2 2.262 0.000 2.263 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.265 0.000 2.265 1.143 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.291 0.000 2.291 1.582 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.434 0.000 0.000 2.435 3.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.495 0.000 0.000 2.496 4.086 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

377

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polystyrene ([C 6 H 5 CHCH 2 ] n ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53768 1.060 68.7 0.16454 3.2224 0.1647 2.5031 3.2999 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.803 7.803 7.077 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.084 6.084 1.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.749 4.749 2.424 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.683 3.683 4.848 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.144 3.144 7.806 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.359 2.359 2.296 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.210 2.211 3.174 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.058 2.058 5.059 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.970 1.971 8.049 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.937 0.000 1.937 1.318 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.936 0.000 1.936 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.942 0.000 1.943 1.834 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.015 0.000 0.000 2.015 3.856 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.048 0.000 0.000 2.049 4.841 × 10 2 1.40

378

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Air (dry, 1 atm) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49919 1.205 × 10 -3 85.7 0.10914 3.3994 1.7418 4.2759 10.5961 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.039 7.039 7.862 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.494 5.495 1.436 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.294 4.294 2.686 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.333 3.333 5.366 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.847 2.847 8.633 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.140 2.140 2.535 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 3.501 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 5.562 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.827 1.827 8.803 × 10 1 257. MeV 3.471 × 10 2 1.815 0.000 1.816 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 1.819 1.430 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.844 0.000 1.844 1.977 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.968 0.000 0.000 1.968 4.074 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.020 0.000 0.000 2.021 5.077 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

379

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead tungstate (PbWO 4 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.41315 8.300 600.7 0.22758 3.0000 0.4068 3.0023 5.8528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.333 4.333 1.311 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.426 3.426 2.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.710 2.711 4.350 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.131 2.131 8.566 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.835 1.835 1.365 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.406 1.406 3.931 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.331 1.331 5.397 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.261 1.261 8.498 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.231 1.231 1.333 × 10 2 227. MeV 3.154 × 10 2 1.229 1.230 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.237 0.000 0.000 1.238 2.145 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.260 0.000 0.000 1.260 2.946 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.349 0.001 0.000 1.350 6.007 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.383 0.001 0.000 1.385 7.469 × 10 2 1.40

380

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Carbon (compact) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) [12.0107 (8)] 2.265 78.0 0.26142 2.8697 -0.0178 2.3415 2.8680 0.12 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.116 7.116 7.772 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.549 5.549 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.331 4.331 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.355 3.355 5.318 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.861 2.861 8.567 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.126 2.127 2.531 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.991 1.992 3.505 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.854 1.854 5.597 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.775 1.775 8.917 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 1.462 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.751 0.000 1.751 2.034 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.820 4.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.850 0.000 0.000 1.851 5.365 × 10

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Methanol (CH 3 OH) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56176 0.791 67.6 0.08970 3.5477 0.2529 2.7639 3.5160 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.169 8.169 6.759 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.369 6.369 1.236 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.972 4.972 2.315 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.855 3.855 4.631 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.291 3.291 7.457 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.469 2.469 2.194 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.321 2.322 3.032 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.166 2.166 4.823 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 7.664 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.039 0.000 2.039 1.254 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 2.038 0.000 2.039 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.045 0.000 2.045 1.744 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.121 0.000 0.000 2.122 3.665 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.156 0.000 0.000 2.157 4.600 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 ×

382

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Carbon (amorphous) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) 12.0107 (8) 2.000 78.0 0.20240 3.0036 -0.0351 2.4860 2.9925 0.10 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.771 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.550 5.551 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.332 4.332 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.357 3.357 5.317 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.862 2.862 8.564 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.129 2.129 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.994 1.994 3.502 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 5.591 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.778 1.779 8.905 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 1.459 × 10 2 313. MeV 4.055 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.755 0.000 1.756 2.030 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.824 0.000 0.000 1.825 4.266 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.855 0.000 0.000 1.856 5.353 × 10

383

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Mix D wax Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56479 0.990 60.9 0.07490 3.6823 0.1371 2.7145 3.0780 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.322 8.322 6.628 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.485 6.486 1.213 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.060 5.060 2.273 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.922 3.922 4.549 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.347 3.347 7.327 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.505 2.506 2.158 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.346 2.346 2.985 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.182 2.182 4.761 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.087 2.087 7.584 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.049 0.000 2.049 1.243 × 10 2 328. MeV 4.201 × 10 2 2.048 0.000 2.048 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.053 0.000 2.053 1.731 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.125 0.000 0.000 2.125 3.647 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.158 0.000 0.000 2.159 4.581 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10 3 2.213

384

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium nitrate NaNO 3 Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49415 2.261 114.6 0.09391 3.5097 0.1534 2.8221 3.6502 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.702 6.702 8.281 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.239 5.239 1.510 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.100 4.100 2.820 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.187 3.187 5.624 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.726 2.726 9.039 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.053 2.053 2.648 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.927 1.927 3.656 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.800 1.800 5.814 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.729 1.729 9.228 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 1.507 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.714 0.000 1.714 2.092 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 0.000 1.787 4.377 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.819 5.486 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

385

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-12B2 (CF 2 Br 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.44901 1.800 284.9 0.05144 3.5565 0.3406 3.7956 5.7976 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.330 5.330 1.053 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.190 4.190 1.908 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.297 3.297 3.540 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.577 2.577 7.017 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.212 2.212 1.123 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.680 1.680 3.263 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.586 1.586 4.491 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.496 1.496 7.099 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.452 1.452 1.118 × 10 2 252. MeV 3.421 × 10 2 1.445 0.000 1.445 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.448 0.000 1.449 1.809 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.467 0.000 0.000 1.468 2.496 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.556 0.000 0.000 1.557 5.139 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.592 0.001 0.000 1.593 6.409 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

386

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Eye lens (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54977 1.100 73.3 0.09690 3.4550 0.2070 2.7446 3.3720 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.912 7.912 6.984 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.171 6.171 1.277 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.390 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.738 3.738 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.192 3.192 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.396 2.396 2.262 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.251 2.251 3.125 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.095 2.096 4.976 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.006 2.006 7.914 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 1.296 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.977 0.000 1.977 1.803 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.051 0.000 0.000 2.051 3.790 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.085 0.000 0.000 2.085 4.756 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

387

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Compact bone (ICRU) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53010 1.850 91.9 0.05822 3.6419 0.0944 3.0201 3.3390 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.406 7.406 7.477 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.783 5.783 1.365 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.521 4.521 2.552 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.511 3.511 5.097 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.000 3.000 8.199 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.247 2.247 2.408 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.106 2.106 3.330 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.962 1.962 5.307 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.444 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.850 1.382 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.856 0.000 1.857 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.930 4.036 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.963 0.000 0.000 1.964 5.063 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

388

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyimide film (C 22 H 10 N 2 O 5 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51264 1.420 79.6 0.15972 3.1921 0.1509 2.5631 3.3497 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.299 7.299 7.576 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.695 5.695 1.385 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.449 4.449 2.590 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.453 3.453 5.177 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.949 2.949 8.332 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.214 2.214 2.448 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 3.384 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.932 1.932 5.392 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.851 1.851 8.577 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 1.404 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.826 0.000 1.827 1.953 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.897 0.000 0.000 1.898 4.102 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.929 0.000 0.000 1.930 5.147 × 10 2 1.40

389

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Silicon dioxide (fused quartz) (SiO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49930 2.200 139.2 0.08408 3.5064 0.1500 3.0140 4.0560 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.591 6.591 8.438 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.158 5.158 1.537 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.041 4.041 2.866 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.145 3.145 5.710 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.691 2.691 9.170 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.030 2.030 2.682 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.908 1.908 3.701 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.786 1.786 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.719 1.719 9.315 × 10 1 288. MeV 3.788 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 1.518 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.711 0.000 1.711 2.105 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.789 0.000 0.000 1.790 4.391 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.823 0.000 0.000 1.824 5.497

390

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Radon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 86 (Rn) [222.01758 (2)]9.066 × 10 -3 794.0 0.20798 2.7409 1.5368 4.9889 13.2839 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.782 3.782 1.535 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.018 3.018 2.730 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.405 2.405 4.980 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.902 1.902 9.715 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.644 1.644 1.540 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.267 1.267 4.394 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.201 1.201 6.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.140 1.140 9.452 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.116 1.117 1.479 × 10 2 216. MeV 3.039 × 10 2 1.116 1.116 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.127 0.000 0.000 1.128 2.372 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.154 0.000 0.000 1.154 3.249 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.258 0.001 0.000 1.260 6.559 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.300 0.001 0.000 1.302 8.119

391

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Solid carbon dioxide (dry ice; CO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49989 1.563 85.0 0.43387 3.0000 0.2000 2.0000 3.4513 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.057 7.057 7.841 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.508 5.508 1.432 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.304 4.304 2.679 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.341 3.341 5.353 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.854 2.854 8.612 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.145 2.145 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 3.493 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.886 1.886 5.554 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.812 1.812 8.811 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 1.438 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.795 0.000 1.795 1.997 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 0.000 1.866 4.182 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.896 0.000 0.000 1.897 5.245 × 10

392

Variable White Dwarf Data Tables  

SciTech Connect

Below, I give a brief explanation of the information in these tables. In all cases, I list the WD {number_sign}, either from the catalog of McCook {ampersand} Sion (1987) or determined by me from the epoch 1950 coordinates. Next, I list the most commonly used name (or alias), then I list the variable star designation if it is available. If not, I list the constellation name and a V** or?? depending on what the last designated variable star for that constellation is. I present epoch 2000 coordinates for all of the stars, which I precessed from the 1950 ones in most cases. I do not include proper motion effects; this is negligible for all except the largest proper motion DAV stars, such as L 19-2, BPM 37093, B 808, and G 29-38. Even in these cases, the error is no more than 30` in declination and 2 s in right ascension. I culled effective temperatures from the latest work (listed under each table); they are now much more homogeneous than before. I pulled the magnitude estimates from the appropriate paper, and they are mean values integrated over several cycles. The amplitude given is for the height of a typical pulse in the light curve. The periods correspond the dominant ones found in the light curve. In some cases, there is a band of power in a given period range, or the light curve is very complex, and I indicate this in the table. In the references, I generally list the paper with the most comprehensive pulsation analysis for the star in question. In some cases, there is more than one good reference, and I list them as well.

Bradley, P. A.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

393

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2008 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 2 0 6,256 6,258 Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 * 0 0 * Hawaii............................. 2,554 5 0 0 2,559 Illinois.............................. 0 15 0 0 15 Indiana............................ 0 30 0 0 30 Iowa ................................ 0 24 3 0 27 Kentucky......................... 0 15 0 0 15 Maryland ......................... 0 181 0 0 181 Massachusetts................ 0 13 0 0 13 Minnesota ....................... 0 46 0 0 46 Missouri .......................... * 6 0 0 6 Nebraska ........................ 0 28 0 0 28 New Hampshire .............. 0 44 0 0 44 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 489 489 New York ........................

394

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2009 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 7,525 7,527 Connecticut..................... 0 * 0 0 * Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 0 52 * 52 Hawaii............................. 2,438 9 0 0 2,447 Illinois.............................. 0 20 0 0 20 Indiana............................ 0 * 0 0 * Iowa ................................ 0 3 0 0 3 Kentucky......................... 0 18 0 0 18 Maryland ......................... 0 170 0 0 170 Massachusetts................ 0 10 0 0 10 Minnesota ....................... 0 47 0 0 47 Missouri .......................... * 10 0 0 10 Nebraska ........................ 0 18 0 0 18 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 454 454 New York ........................

395

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 4 0 5,144 5,148 Delaware ........................ 0 1 0 0 1 Georgia........................... 0 0 732 0 732 Hawaii............................. 2,465 6 0 0 2,472 Illinois.............................. 0 17 0 0 17 Indiana............................ 0 1 0 0 1 Iowa ................................ 0 2 0 0 2 Kentucky......................... 0 5 0 0 5 Louisiana ........................ 0 0 249 0 249 Maryland ......................... 0 115 0 0 115 Massachusetts................ 0 * 0 0 * Minnesota ....................... 0 12 0 0 12 Missouri .......................... * 18 0 0 18 Nebraska ........................ 0 12 0 0 12 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 457 457 New York ........................

396

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2007 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 6,866 6,869 Delaware ........................ 0 5 0 0 5 Georgia........................... 0 2 0 0 2 Hawaii............................. 2,679 4 0 0 2,683 Illinois.............................. 0 11 0 0 11 Indiana............................ 0 81 0 554 635 Iowa ................................ 0 2 38 0 40 Kentucky......................... 0 124 0 0 124 Maryland ......................... 0 245 0 0 245 Massachusetts................ 0 15 0 0 15 Minnesota ....................... 0 54 0 0 54 Missouri .......................... 7 60 0 0 66 Nebraska ........................ 0 33 0 0 33 New Hampshire .............. 0 9 0 0 9 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 379 379 New York ........................

397

Table-top job analysis  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this Handbook is to establish general training program guidelines for training personnel in developing training for operation, maintenance, and technical support personnel at Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. TTJA is not the only method of job analysis; however, when conducted properly TTJA can be cost effective, efficient, and self-validating, and represents an effective method of defining job requirements. The table-top job analysis is suggested in the DOE Training Accreditation Program manuals as an acceptable alternative to traditional methods of analyzing job requirements. DOE 5480-20A strongly endorses and recommends it as the preferred method for analyzing jobs for positions addressed by the Order.

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

398

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - Low Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main Low Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year Low Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions

399

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - High Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main High Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary High Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year High Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Excel Gif

400

Department of Computing Stepwise Refinement in Event-B||CSP  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

in Event-B||CSP Part 1: Safety Steve Schneider, Helen Treharne and Heike Wehrheim March 12th 2011 #12;Stepwise Refinement in Event-B CSP Part 1: Safety Steve Schneider1 Helen Treharne1 Heike Wehrheim2 1, 2011 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 CSP 3 2.1 Notation

Doran, Simon J.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

4. U.S. Refiner Wholesale Petroleum Product Prices Figure J F M A M J J A S O N D 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1996 Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes Kero-jet Propane No. 1 Distillate No....

402

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4. U.S. Refiner Wholesale Petroleum Product Prices Figure J F M A M J J A S O N D 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1997 Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes Kero-jet Propane No. 1 Distillate No....

403

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-782A, "Refiners...  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4. U.S. Refiner Wholesale Petroleum Product Prices Figure J F M A M J J A S O N D 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1995 Cents per Gallon Excluding Taxes Kero-jet Propane No. 1 Distillate No....

404

Delaunay Refinement for Piecewise Smooth Complexes Siu-Wing Cheng  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

a Lipschitz-like property. A Delaunay refinement algo- rithm using the weighted Voronoi diagram is shown]. However, an algorithm that handles input as general as piecewise smooth complexes (PSC) is still lacking. There is a need in solid modeling to represent objects that are dimensionally or materially inhomogeneous [22

Cheng, Siu-Wing

405

Kenney: The USSOCOM Trinity The USSOCOM Trinity: Refining Special Operations  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

was that the American military would plan, train, and equip to conduct major combat operations on opposite sidesKenney: The USSOCOM Trinity 1 The USSOCOM Trinity: Refining Special Operations Commitment to 21st on the United States Special Operations Command and recommends means and methods to capitalize on current

406

Liver vasculature refinement with multiple 3D structuring element shapes  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Delineating anatomical structures and other regions of interest is an important component of assisting and automating specific diagnostic, radiological, and surgical tasks. In this paper, a segmentation approach for liver region delineation is proposed, ... Keywords: 3D structuring element, Hysteresis thresholding, Mathematical morphology, Region growing, Texture analysis, Vessel tree refinement

Do-Yeon Kim

2014-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

407

TOPICAL PAPER Potential Synergies and Challenges in Refining Cellulosic Biomass  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

TOPICAL PAPER Potential Synergies and Challenges in Refining Cellulosic Biomass to Fuels, Chemicals that can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance energy security, improve the economy, dispose of such products, and sugar costs are predicted to drop with plant size as a result of economies of scale

California at Riverside, University of

408

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, October 1991  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

409

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, August 1991  

SciTech Connect

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (August 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M., Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

410

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, September 1991  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

411

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1991  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

412

Environmental regulatory update table, July 1991  

SciTech Connect

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (July 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

413

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1990  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Hawkins, G.T.; Houlberg, L.M.; Noghrei-Nikbakht, P.A.; Salk, M.S.

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

414

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

3 3 Table 9 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:08:24 PM Table 9. Underground natural gas storage - by season, 2011-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year, Season, and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2011 Refill Season April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100 -212 May 4,304 2,187 6,491 -233 -9.6 458 58 -399 June 4,302 2,530 6,831 -210 -7.7 421 80 -340 July 4,300 2,775 7,075 -190 -6.4 359 116 -244 August 4,300 3,019 7,319 -134 -4.2 370 126 -244 September 4,301 3,416 7,717 -92 -2.6 454 55

415

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1) 1) June 2013 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2011 2011 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table E1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price Estimates, 2011 (Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector g,h Retail Electricity Total Energy g,i Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total g,h,i Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Other e Total Wood and Waste f Alabama 3.09 5.66 26.37 22.77 25.54 27.12 13.18 19.42 25.90 0.61 3.01 8.75 2.56 27.08 19.85 Alaska 3.64 6.70 29.33 23.12 29.76 31.60 20.07 34.62 26.61 - 14.42 20.85 6.36 47.13 25.17 Arizona 1.99 7.07 27.73 22.84 31.95 26.97 17.00 17.23 26.71 0.75 6.31 10.79 2.16 28.46 25.23 Arkansas 1.93 6.94 26.37 22.45 26.66 27.35 17.35 33.22

416

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Monthly 31 Table 13 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:28:44 PM Table 13. Activities of underground natural gas storage operators, by state, September 2013 (volumes in million cubic feet) State Field Count Total Storage Capacity Working Gas Storage Capacity Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Alabama 2 35,400 27,350 8,050 21,262 29,312 2,852 15.5 1,743 450 Alaska a 5 83,592 67,915 14,197 20,455 34,652 NA NA 1,981 30 Arkansas 2 21,853 12,178 9,648 3,372 13,020 -1,050 -23.7 204 0 California 14 599,711 374,296

417

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2004 2004 Consumption Summary Tables Table S1. Energy Consumption Estimates by Source and End-Use Sector, 2004 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Power d Biomass e Other f Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/Losses g Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Alabama 2,159.7 853.9 404.0 638.5 329.9 106.5 185.0 0.1 -358.2 393.7 270.2 1,001.1 494.7 Alaska 779.1 14.1 411.8 334.8 0.0 15.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 56.4 63.4 393.4 266.0 Arizona 1,436.6 425.4 354.9 562.8 293.1 69.9 8.7 3.6 -281.7 368.5 326.0 231.2 511.0 Arkansas 1,135.9 270.2 228.9 388.3 161.1 36.5 76.0 0.6 -25.7 218.3 154.7 473.9 288.9 California 8,364.6 68.9 2,474.2 3,787.8 315.6 342.2

418

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9) 9) June 2011 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2009 2009 Consumption Summary Tables Table C1. Energy Consumption Overview: Estimates by Energy Source and End-Use Sector, 2009 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy e Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/ Losses f Net Electricity Imports Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum d Total Alabama 1,906.8 631.0 473.9 583.9 1,688.8 415.4 272.9 -470.3 0.0 383.2 266.0 788.5 469.2 Alaska 630.4 14.5 344.0 255.7 614.1 0.0 16.3 0.0 (s) 53.4 61.0 325.4 190.6 Arizona 1,454.3 413.3 376.7 520.8 1,310.8 320.7 103.5 -279.9 -0.8 400.8 352.1 207.8 493.6 Arkansas 1,054.8 264.1 248.1 343.1 855.3 158.7 126.5 -85.7 0.0 226.3 167.0 372.5

419

Microsoft Word - table_01.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

3 3 Table 1 Table 1. Summary of natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Year and Month Gross Withdrawals Marketed Production NGPL Production a Dry Gas Production b Supplemental Gaseous Fuels c Net Imports Net Storage Withdrawals d Balancing Item e Consumption f 2008 Total 25,636 21,112 953 20,159 61 3,021 34 2 23,277 2009 Total 26,057 21,648 1,024 20,624 65 2,679 -355 -103 22,910 2010 Total 26,816 22,382 1,066 21,316 65 2,604 -13 115 24,087 2011 January 2,299 1,953 92 1,861 5 236 811 R -24 R 2,889 February 2,104 1,729 82 1,647 4 186 594 R 20 R 2,452 March 2,411 2,002 95 1,908 5 171 151 R -4 R 2,230 April 2,350 1,961 93 1,868 5 R 152 -216 R 17 R 1,825 May 2,411 2,031

420

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Annual 4 Table 2 Alabama 215,710 7,110 -162,223 617,883 0 -2,478 0 666,738 Alaska 351,259 21,470 22,663 0 -9,342 0 0 343,110 Arizona 117 0 -13,236 389,036 -43,838 0 0 332,079 Arkansas 1,146,168 424 -18,281 -831,755 0 -103 0 295,811 California 246,822 12,755 104,820 2,222,355 -109,787 48,071 0 2,403,385 Colorado 1,709,376 81,943 -107,940 -1,077,968 0 2,570 4,412 443,367 Connecticut 0 0 4,191 225,228 0 260 0 229,159 Delaware 0 0 21,035 80,692 0 51 * 101,676 District of Columbia 0 0 497 28,075 0 0 0 28,572 Florida 18,681 0 15,168 1,294,620 0 0 0 1,328,469

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

TableHC2.12.xls  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Detached Attached 2 to 4 Units Energy Information Administration: 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing...

422

TableHC10.13.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

or More... 0.3 Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators U.S. Census Region Northeast Midwest Table HC10.13 Lighting Usage...

423

TABLE54.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Administration (EIA) Forms EIA-812, "Monthly Product Pipeline Report," and EIA-813, Monthly Crude Oil Report." Table 54. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline...

424

TABLE19.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Table 19. PAD District IV-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

425

TABLE15.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Table 15. PAD District III-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

426

TABLE53.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Table 53. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline, Tanker, and Barge Between July 2004 Crude Oil ... 0 383 0...

427

TABLE11.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

(Thousand Barrels) Table 11. PAD District II-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

428

2011 Annual Report Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

) ...................12 Smart Grid Cyber Security.....................................................13 ICT Supply ChainComputer Security Division 2011 Annual Report #12;Table of Contents Welcome ................................................................. 1 Division Organization .................................................2 The Computer Security

429

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Volume II Table of Contents SURVEY OF AVAILABLE DATA Introduction ...................................................................................13 EVALUATING GIS HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE Introduction ...................................................................................14 Sources of Information About GIS......................................................14 GIS

Ghelli, Giorgio

430

Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - High Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6-2030) 6-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 XLS GIF Spreadsheets are provided in Excel High Price Case Tables (2006-2030) Table Title Formats Summary High Price Case Tables PDF GIF High Price Case Tables XLS GIF Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary XLS GIF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption XLS GIF Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions XLS GIF Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

431

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

"Monthly Foreign Crude Oil Acquisition Report"; and Form EIA-14, "Refiners' Monthly Cost Report." 0 6 12 18 24 30 J F M A M J J A S O N D 1998 Dollars per Barrel RAC First...

432

Exhibit C Table of Contents  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" SCHEDULES AND LISTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Form Title A Schedule of Quantities and Prices B Milestone and Payment Schedule C Lower-Tier Subcontractor and Vendor List Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 2 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" FORM A SCHEDULE OF QUANTITIES AND PRICES NOTE: This Exhibit "C" Form A is part of the model subcontract for Trinity and is provided to Offerors for informational purposes only. It is not intended that this form be returned with the Offeror's proposal. 1.0 WORK TO BE PERFORMED Work shall be performed strictly in accordance with requirements of the Subcontract

433

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2005 Alabama .................................. 255,157 9,748 13,759 37,048 Alaska...................................... 3,089,229 23,700 27,956 105,449 Arkansas.................................. 16,756 177 231 786 California ................................. 226,230 11,101 13,748 45,926 Colorado .................................. 730,948 25,603 34,782 95,881 Florida...................................... 3,584 359 495 1,400 Illinois....................................... 280 37 46 129 Kansas..................................... 476,656 22,165 31,521 85,737 Kentucky.................................. 38,792 1,411 1,716 5,725 Louisiana ................................. 2,527,636 73,035 103,381

434

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Producing Gas Wells by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2006-2010 Alabama .......................................................... 6,227 6,591 6,860 6,913 7,026 Alaska.............................................................. 231 239 261 261 269 Arizona ............................................................ 7 7 6 6 5 Arkansas.......................................................... 3,814 4,773 5,592 6,314 7,397 California ......................................................... 1,451 1,540 1,645 1,643 1,580 Colorado .......................................................... 20,568 22,949 25,716 27,021 28,813 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 2,419 2,552 1,527 1,984 1,852 Illinois...............................................................

435

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2004-2008, and by State, 2008 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ R 16,335,710 -- R 6.25 R 20,196,346 R 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,424,440 -- 7.96 21,239,516 169,038,089 Alabama ............................... 246,747 2,382,188 9.65 257,884 2,489,704 Alaska................................... 337,359 2,493,128 7.39 398,442 2,944,546 Arizona ................................. 503 3,568 7.09 523 3,710 Arkansas...............................

436

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... 2,476 281 2,757 2,789 271 3,060 Alaska.......................... 2 4 6 2 1 3 Arizona ........................ 285 98 383 274 116 390 Arkansas...................... 648 456 1,104 582 443 1,025 California ..................... 36,124 R 3,467 R 39,591 35,126 3,762 38,888 Colorado ...................... 341 4,475 4,816 297 4,787 5,084 Connecticut.................. 2,386 810 3,196 2,228 910 3,138 Delaware ..................... 96 69 165 39 73 112 Florida.......................... 161 288 449 123 484 607 Georgia........................ 1,003 1,887 2,890 956 1,298 2,254 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 25 0 25 Idaho............................ 108 91 199 109 78 187 Illinois...........................

437

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... 2,495 R 304 R 2,799 2,487 299 2,786 Alaska.......................... 6 4 10 7 5 12 Arizona ........................ 328 86 414 319 106 425 Arkansas...................... 782 R 441 R 1,223 671 449 1,120 California ..................... 39,426 2,061 41,487 38,150 2,076 40,226 Colorado ...................... 393 3,782 4,175 364 3,954 4,318 Connecticut.................. 2,625 845 3,470 2,618 819 3,437 Delaware ..................... 134 52 186 124 55 179 Florida.......................... R 174 224 R 398 159 273 432 Georgia........................ R 993 2,168 R 3,161 854 2,599 3,453 Hawaii.......................... 29 0 29 28 0 28 Idaho............................ 117 79 196 116 79 195

438

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2001-2005 Alabama .......................................................... 4,597 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 Alaska.............................................................. 170 165 195 224 227 Arizona ............................................................ 8 7 9 6 6 Arkansas.......................................................... 4,825 6,755 7,606 3,460 2,878 California ......................................................... 1,244 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 Colorado .......................................................... 22,117 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,271 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 Illinois...............................................................

439

EM International Program Action Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 E M I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r o g r a m s Page 1 ACTION TABLE Subject Lead Office Engaging Country Meeting Location Purpose Status Date of Event 3 rd US/German Workshop on Salt Repository Research, Design and Operations N. Buschman, EM-22 Germany Albuquerque & Carlsbad, NM Continue collaboration with Germans on salt repository research, design and operations. Draft agenda prepared. October 8-12, 2012 International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) Ministerial R. Elmetti, EM- 2.1 Multilateral Marrakech, Morocco To support the development of nuclear energy infrastructure globally through workforce training, information sharing, and approaches related to the safe, secure and responsible use of

440

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2009 Alabama .................................. 248,232 11,667 17,232 42,984 Alaska...................................... 2,830,034 19,542 22,925 86,767 Arkansas.................................. 2,352 125 168 541 California ................................. 198,213 11,042 13,722 45,669 Colorado .................................. 1,233,260 47,705 67,607 174,337 Illinois....................................... 164 24 31 84 Kansas..................................... 370,670 18,863 26,948 72,922 Kentucky.................................. 60,167 2,469 3,270 9,982 Louisiana ................................. 2,175,026 67,067 95,359 250,586 Michigan .................................. 23,819 2,409

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 11 0 0 6,138 6,149 Connecticut.................. 0 91 0 0 0 91 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 3 0 0 0 3 Hawaii.......................... 2,610 3 0 0 0 2,613 Illinois........................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Indiana......................... 0 2 0 0 1,640 1,642 Iowa ............................. 0 * 0 0 46 46 Kentucky...................... 0 3 0 0 0 3 Maryland ...................... 0 41 0 0 0 41 Massachusetts............. 0 51 0 0 0 51 Minnesota .................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Missouri ....................... 0 78 0 0 0 78 Nebraska ..................... 0 19 0 0 0 19 New Hampshire ........... 0 92 0 0 0 92 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 175 175 New York .....................

442

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

20 20 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2004-2008 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 3,589,221 Mexico ...................................................... 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 43,314 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 3,632,535 LNG Algeria....................................................... 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 0 Australia.................................................... 14,990 0 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 54,839 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

443

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2007 Alabama .................................. 257,443 13,381 19,831 48,922 Alaska...................................... 2,965,956 22,419 26,332 99,472 Arkansas.................................. 11,532 126 162 552 California ................................. 206,239 11,388 13,521 47,045 Colorado .................................. 888,705 27,447 38,180 102,563 Florida...................................... 2,422 103 132 423 Illinois....................................... 235 38 48 131 Kansas..................................... 391,022 19,600 28,063 74,941 Kentucky.................................. 38,158 1,455 1,957 5,917 Louisiana ................................. 2,857,443 77,905 110,745

444

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C11. Energy Consumption by Source, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum b Retail Electricity Sales State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu 1 Texas 1,695.2 Texas 3,756.9 Texas 5,934.3 Texas 1,283.1 2 Indiana 1,333.4 California 2,196.6 California 3,511.4 California 893.7 3 Ohio 1,222.6 Louisiana 1,502.9 Louisiana 1,925.7 Florida 768.0 4 Pennsylvania 1,213.0 New York 1,246.9 Florida 1,680.3 Ohio 528.0 5 Illinois 1,052.2 Florida 1,236.6 New York 1,304.0 Pennsylvania 507.6 6 Kentucky 1,010.6 Pennsylvania 998.6 Pennsylvania 1,255.6 New York 491.5

445

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2008 Alabama .................................. 253,028 11,753 17,222 43,191 Alaska...................................... 2,901,760 20,779 24,337 92,305 Arkansas.................................. 6,531 103 139 446 California ................................. 195,272 11,179 13,972 46,176 Colorado .................................. 1,029,641 37,804 53,590 139,332 Florida...................................... 300 16 22 65 Illinois....................................... 233 33 42 115 Kansas..................................... 397,587 19,856 28,302 76,021 Kentucky.................................. 58,899 1,783 2,401 7,233 Louisiana ................................. 2,208,920 66,369 94,785 245,631

446

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2002-2006 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 Mexico ...................................................... 1,755 0 0 9,320 12,749 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 LNG Algeria....................................................... 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 Australia.................................................... 0 0 14,990 0 0 Brunei ....................................................... 2,401 0 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

447

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2001-2005 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,728,537 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 Mexico ...................................................... 10,276 1,755 0 0 9,320 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,738,814 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 LNG Algeria....................................................... 64,945 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 Australia.................................................... 2,394 0 0 14,990 0 Brunei ....................................................... 0 2,401 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

448

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2002-2006 Alabama .......................................................... 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 Alaska.............................................................. 165 195 224 227 231 Arizona ............................................................ 7 9 6 6 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 6,755 7,606 3,460 R 3,462 3,811 California ......................................................... 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 Colorado .......................................................... 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 1,946 Illinois...............................................................

449

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 67,561 135 R 67,696 67,099 135 67,234 Alaska R 12,724 303 R 13,027 13,073 61 13,134 Arizona 56,349 198 56,547 56,252 280 56,532 Arkansas 67,454 361 67,815 68,151 614 68,765

450

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2003-2007 Alabama .......................................................... 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 6,591 Alaska.............................................................. 195 224 227 231 239 Arizona ............................................................ 9 6 6 7 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 7,606 3,460 3,462 R 3,814 4,773 California ......................................................... 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 1,540 Colorado .......................................................... 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 22,949 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,039 2,781 2,123 R 2,419 2,552 Illinois...............................................................

451

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2003-2007 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 Mexico ...................................................... 0 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 LNG Algeria....................................................... 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 Australia.................................................... 0 14,990 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

452

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2007-2008 Alabama ...................... 2,409 295 2,704 2,476 281 2,757 Alaska.......................... 7 4 11 2 4 6 Arizona ........................ 296 99 395 285 98 383 Arkansas...................... 637 418 1,055 648 456 1,104 California ..................... 35,814 3,320 39,134 36,124 3,533 39,657 Colorado ...................... 298 4,294 4,592 341 4,475 4,816 Connecticut.................. 2,472 845 3,317 2,386 810 3,196 Delaware ..................... 125 60 185 96 69 165 Florida.......................... 156 311 467 161 288 449 Georgia........................ R 1,013 1,900 R 2,913 1,003 1,887 2,890 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 27 0 27 Idaho............................ 109 79 188 108 91 199 Illinois...........................

453

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2006 Alabama .................................. 287,278 14,736 21,065 54,529 Alaska...................................... 2,665,742 20,993 24,638 93,346 Arkansas.................................. 13,702 166 212 734 California ................................. 223,580 11,267 14,056 46,641 Colorado .................................. 751,036 26,111 36,317 97,697 Florida...................................... 3,972 357 485 1,416 Illinois....................................... 242 37 47 128 Kansas..................................... 453,111 21,509 30,726 83,137 Kentucky.................................. 39,559 1,666 2,252 6,763 Louisiana ................................. 2,511,802 73,551 105,236

454

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2005-2009 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ R 18,305,411 -- R 7.97 R 21,112,053 R 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 21,604,158 79,188,096 Alabama ............................... 225,666 975,789 4.32 236,029 1,020,599 Alaska................................... 397,077 1,163,555 2.93 397,077 1,163,554 Arizona ................................. 695 2,214 3.19 712 2,269 Arkansas............................... 680,613 2,332,956 3.43

455

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2010-2011 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 68,017 146 R 68,163 67,522 135 67,657 Alaska 12,673 325 12,998 12,721 303 13,024 Arizona 56,510 166 56,676 56,349 198 56,547 Arkansas 67,676 311 67,987 67,454 361 67,815 California 399,290 40,282

456

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2006-2010 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,305,411 -- 7.97 21,112,053 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 R 21,647,936 R 79,348,561 2010 Total ............................ 19,262,198 -- 4.48 22,402,141 100,272,654 Alabama ............................... 212,769 949,340 4.46 222,932 994,688 Alaska................................... 316,546 1,002,566 3.17 374,226 1,185,249 Arizona ................................. 165 676 4.11 183 753 Arkansas............................... 936,600 3,594,843 3.84

457

Microsoft Word - table_10.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

4 4 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:09:15 PM Table 10. Underground natural gas storage - salt cavern storage fields, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 440 398 -42 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 459 403 -56 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 511 452 -58 2011 January 137 174 311 65 59.3 23 69 46 February 137 125 262 48 62.5 30 80 49 March 137 151 288 39 34.8 51 25 -25 April 140 172 312 17 11.2 42 21 -22 May 140 211 352

458

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 2 0 0 5,283 5,285 Connecticut.................. 0 273 0 0 0 273 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 * 0 0 0 * Hawaii.......................... 2,593 14 0 0 0 2,606 Illinois........................... 0 11 0 4 0 15 Indiana......................... 0 30 0 0 1,958 1,988 Iowa ............................. 0 2 0 30 0 31 Kentucky...................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Maryland ...................... 0 382 0 0 0 382 Massachusetts............. 0 46 0 0 0 46 Minnesota .................... 0 154 0 0 0 154 Missouri ....................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Nebraska ..................... 0 16 0 * 0 16 New Hampshire ........... 0 84 0 0 0 84 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 435 435 New York

459

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

17 17 Table C12. Total Energy Consumption, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Total Energy Consumption Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP State Trillion Btu State Billion Chained (2005) Dollars State Thousand Btu per Chained (2005) Dollar 1 Texas 12,206.6 California 1,735.4 Louisiana 19.7 2 California 7,858.4 Texas 1,149.9 Wyoming 17.5 3 Florida 4,217.1 New York 1,016.4 North Dakota 15.4 4 Louisiana 4,055.3 Florida 661.1 Alaska 14.3 5 Illinois 3,977.8 Illinois 582.1 Mississippi 13.8 6 Ohio 3,827.6 Pennsylvania 500.4 Kentucky 13.5

460

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2003-2007, and by State, 2007 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ R 15,981,421 -- R 6.39 R 19,409,674 R 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,031,199 -- 6.37 20,019,321 127,530,680 Alabama ............................... 259,062 1,926,374 7.44 270,407 2,010,736 Alaska................................... 368,344 2,072,647 5.63 433,485 2,439,193 Arizona ................................. 634 3,791 5.98 655 3,913 Arkansas...............................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


461

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2010 Alabama .................................. 242,444 13,065 19,059 47,741 Alaska...................................... 2,731,803 17,798 20,835 79,355 Arkansas.................................. 9,599 160 213 692 California ................................. 204,327 10,400 13,244 42,509 Colorado .................................. 1,434,003 57,924 82,637 209,191 Kansas..................................... 341,778 18,424 26,251 70,425 Kentucky.................................. 66,579 3,317 4,576 13,311 Louisiana ................................. 2,207,760 71,231 102,448 262,178 Michigan .................................. 23,449 2,207 2,943 8,272 Mississippi ...............................

462

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

7 7 Table 7. Supplemental gas supplies by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) Colorado 0 99 0 4,313 4,412 Georgia 0 0 660 0 660 Hawaii 2,491 20 0 0 2,510 Illinois 0 1 0 0 1 Indiana 0 1 0 0 1 Kentucky 0 1 0 0 1 Louisiana 0 0 553 0 553 Maryland 0 116 0 0 116 Minnesota 0 9 0 0 9 Missouri * 0 0 0 * Nebraska 0 4 0 0 4 New Jersey 0 0 0 139 139 North Dakota 52,541 0 0 0 52,541 Ohio 0 6 360 0 366 Pennsylvania 0 2 0 0 2 Vermont 0 3 0 0 3 Virginia 0 48 0 0 48 Total 55,032 309 1,573 4,452 61,366 State Synthetic Natural Gas Propane-Air Biomass Gas Other Total * Volume is less than 500,000 cubic feet.

463

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SECTION B: HOUSING TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SECTION C: HOME HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SECTION D: AIR CONDITIONING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 SECTION E: WATER HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 SECTION F: LIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 SECTION G: APPLIANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cooking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Refrigerators and Freezers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

464

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

The Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the AEO using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO projections.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

465

Tables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

design challenges for tabletop interfaces: integrating access to public and private information, managing a cooperative gesture to organize digital documents on an interactive table. Our tabletop interface designTables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with Ubicomp Environments Abstract Our work

Klemmer, Scott

466

Tafel Musik: Formatting algorithm of tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper provides a description on the formatting algorithm of tables that the authors have developed. This algorithm is an important component of the so called TafeMusik (Tafel Musik) environment. TafeMusikprovides the user with an environment to ... Keywords: First-fit algorithm, Linear programming, Optimization, Tables, Tabular formatting, Tabular layout

K. -H. Shin; K. Kobayashi; A. Suzuki

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

467

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 5. South Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

468

Atlantic Basin Refining Dynamics from U.S. Perspective  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

This presentation focuses on the current refining situation in the Atlantic Basin, This presentation focuses on the current refining situation in the Atlantic Basin, Page 1 including some discussion on how we got here, and on drivers that will influence the next 5 years. I will focus on three topics today that are critical to the petroleum product dynamics of Page 2 the Atlantic Basin over the next several years. The first is product demand growth - something that has been affected both by the recession and legislation. Next I will cover the supply situation for gasoline and distillates in the Atlantic Basin, since Europe and the U.S. are closely entwined in these markets. Last, we will visit the outlook for those drivers affecting profitability - an area of large uncertainty. I will begin today with a short discussion of important underlying long-term trends in U.S.

469

,"U.S. Sales for Resale, Total Refiner Motor Gasoline Sales Volumes...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

for Refiner Gasoline Volumes" "Sourcekey","A103700001" "Date","U.S. Total Gasoline WholesaleResale Volume by Refiners (Thousand Gallons per Day)" 30331,217871.4 30362,217946.8...

470

Development of miscella refining process for cottonseed oil-isopropyl alcohol system: laboratory-scale evaluations  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

A technologically feasible cottonseed oil-isopropyl alcohol (IPA) miscella refining process was developed to produce high quality cottonseed oil. Individual steps necessary to refine cottonseed oil-IPA miscella were determined and improved...

Chau, Chi-Fai

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

471

The Extraction?Flocculation Re-refining Lubricating Oil Process Using Ternary Organic Solvents  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The Extraction?Flocculation Re-refining Lubricating Oil Process Using Ternary Organic Solvents ... Res., 1997, 36 (9), ... Waste lubricating oils may be re-refined with organic solvents that dissolve base oil and segregate the additives and solid particles. ...

J. P. Martins

1997-09-02T23:59:59.000Z

472

Life cycle and matrix analyses for re-refined Oil in Japan  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Unstable market systems and consumer preferences for virgin oil have inhibited the development of waste oil re-refining in Japan. In this papery comparative life cycle inventories were developed for re-refining w...

Chie Nakaniwa; Thomas E. Graedel

2002-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

473

On the limits of refinement-testing for model-checking CSP  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Refinement-checking, as embodied in tools like FDR, PAT and ProB, is a popular approach for model-checking refinement-closed predicates of CSP processes. We consider the limits of this ... denotational predicate ...

Toby Murray

2013-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

474

RFA-14-0001 - In the Matter of Commonwealth Oil Refining Company...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

RFA-14-0001 - In the Matter of Commonwealth Oil Refining Company, Inc.Commonwealth of Puerto Rico RFA-14-0001 - In the Matter of Commonwealth Oil Refining Company, Inc....

475

Fact #676: May 23, 2011 U.S. Refiners Produce about 19 Gallons...  

Energy Savers (EERE)

6: May 23, 2011 U.S. Refiners Produce about 19 Gallons of Gasoline from a Barrel of Oil Fact 676: May 23, 2011 U.S. Refiners Produce about 19 Gallons of Gasoline from a Barrel of...

476

REFINING AND END USE STUDY OF COAL LIQUIDS  

SciTech Connect

This document summarizes all of the work conducted as part of the Refining and End Use Study of Coal Liquids. There were several distinct objectives set, as the study developed over time: (1) Demonstration of a Refinery Accepting Coal Liquids; (2) Emissions Screening of Indirect Diesel; (3) Biomass Gasification F-T Modeling; and (4) Updated Gas to Liquids (GTL) Baseline Design/Economic Study.

Unknown

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

477

Evolutions in 3D numerical relativity using fixed mesh refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

We present results of 3D numerical simulations using a finite difference code featuring fixed mesh refinement (FMR), in which a subset of the computational domain is refined in space and time. We apply this code to a series of test cases including a robust stability test, a nonlinear gauge wave and an excised Schwarzschild black hole in an evolving gauge. We find that the mesh refinement results are comparable in accuracy, stability and convergence to unigrid simulations with the same effective resolution. At the same time, the use of FMR reduces the computational resources needed to obtain a given accuracy. Particular care must be taken at the interfaces between coarse and fine grids to avoid a loss of convergence at higher resolutions, and we introduce the use of "buffer zones" as one resolution of this issue. We also introduce a new method for initial data generation, which enables higher-order interpolation in time even from the initial time slice. This FMR system, "Carpet", is a driver module in the freely available Cactus computational infrastructure, and is able to endow generic existing Cactus simulation modules ("thorns") with FMR with little or no extra effort.

Erik Schnetter; Scott H. Hawley; Ian Hawke

2004-03-02T23:59:59.000Z

478

Refinement and verification of concurrent systems specified in ObjectZ and CSP  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Refinement and verification of concurrent systems specified in Object­Z and CSP Graeme Smith­Z and CSP. A common semantic basis for the two languages enables a unified method of refinement to be used, based upon CSP refinement. To enable state­based techniques to be used for the Object­Z components

Smith, Graeme

479

A Multi-Tiered Genetic Algorithm for Data Mining and Hypothesis Refinement  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

. The second stage of testing was on the ability to take results from a previous algorithm and perform refinement on the data model. Initially, Arcanum was used to refine its own data models. Of the six data models used for hypothesis refinement, Arcanum...

Taylor, Christopher M.

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

480

1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Consumption and Expenditures Tables Table C1. Total Energy Consumption by Major Fuel ............................................... 124 Table C2. Total Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel................................................ 130 Table C3. Consumption for Sum of Major Fuels ...................................................... 135 Table C4. Expenditures for Sum of Major Fuels....................................................... 140 Table C5. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels................................................................................................... 145 Table C6. Expenditures by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels......................... 150 Table C7. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Building Size for Sum of

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "table 1a refiner" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


481

T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information...

482

Table 4-3 Site Wide Environmental Management Matrix  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Table 4-3. Site-Wide Environmental Management Matrix National Renewable Energy Laboratory's South Table Mountain Complex FINAL POTENTIAL ISSUES PROGRAM OF IMPROVEMENTS Off- Site...

483

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

7 7 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:04:58 PM Table 3. Selected national average natural gas prices, 2008-2013 (dollars per thousand cubic feet, except where noted) Year and Month NGL Composite Spot Price a Natural Gas Spot Price b Citygate Price Delivered to Consumers Electric Power Price d Residential Commercial Industrial Price % of Total c Price % of Total c Price % of Total c 2008 Annual Average 15.20 8.86 9.18 13.89 97.5 12.23 79.7 9.65 20.4 9.26 2009 Annual Average 8.99 5.24 6.48 12.14 97.4 10.06 77.8 5.33 18.8 4.93 2010 Annual Average 11.83 4.37 6.18 11.39 97.4 9.47 77.5 5.49 18.0 5.27 2011 January 13.03 4.49 5.69 9.90 96.5 R 8.74 72.8 R 5.66 R 16.8 5.66 February 13.64 4.09 5.75 10.14 96.5 8.88 72.0 R 5.77 R 16.6

484

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and estimated extraction loss by state, 2011 Alabama 230,546 12,265 17,271 43,636 Alaska 2,721,396 18,314 21,554 82,255 Arkansas 5,611 212 268 883 California 180,648 9,831 12,095 39,909 Colorado 1,507,467 63,075 90,801 223,858 Illinois 15,727 705 1,043 2,409 Kansas 322,944 18,098 25,804 67,845 Kentucky 60,941 3,398 4,684 13,377 Louisiana 2,048,175 66,426 95,630 239,349 Michigan 21,518 2,132 2,465 7,875 Mississippi 126,859 7,732 11,221 28,404 Montana 11,185 927 1,252 3,744 New Mexico 795,069 61,857 90,291 223,829 North Dakota 112,206 10,199 14,182 41,156 Oklahoma 1,218,855 91,963 134,032 328,694 Pennsylvania 131,959 6,721 8,931 26,896 Tennessee 6,200

485

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 120,717 77.85 125,467 78.45 124,857 78.77 R 129,337 R 79.22 115,449 76.41 Alaska................................... 2,539 3.78 6,411 9.76 11,433 27.77 15,472 R 33.10 16,582 31.35 Arizona ................................. 11,380 53.61 10,089 58.81 9,174 60.05 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 Arkansas............................... 114,976 94.00 112,544 95.03 105,215 94.65 R 94,613 R 94.06 84,177 94.77 California .............................. 606,097 90.94 682,886 92.26 740,589 95.06 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 Colorado ............................... 136,704 99.27 128,709 98.75 111,291 99.07 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41

486

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 5. Number of producing gas wells by state and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2008-2012 Alabama 6,860 6,913 7,026 7,063 6,327 Alaska 261 261 269 277 185 Arizona 6 6 5 5 5 Arkansas 5,592 6,314 7,397 8,388 8,538 California 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 1,423 Colorado 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 32,000 Gulf of Mexico 1,527 1,984 1,852 1,559 1,474 Illinois 45 51 50 40 40 Indiana 525 563 620 914 819 Kansas 17,862 21,243 22,145 25,758 24,697 Kentucky 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 17,936 Louisiana 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 19,792 Maryland 7 7 7 8 9 Michigan 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 10,900 Mississippi 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 1,669 Missouri 0 0 0 53 100 Montana 7,095 7,031 6,059 6,477 6,240 Nebraska 322 285 276 322 270 Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 New Mexico 44,241 44,784

487

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2011 (million cubic feet) Alabama 195,581 17,271 -53,277 480,317 0 7,282 0 598,068 Alaska 356,225 21,554 14,450 0 -16,398 0 0 332,723 Arizona 168 0 -17,607 348,820 -42,026 0 0 289,357 Arkansas 1,072,212 268 3,943 -791,878 0 212 0 283,797 California 250,177 12,095 72,353 1,954,947 -91,287 20,598 0 2,153,498 Colorado 1,637,576 90,801 -76,093 -1,005,837 0 3,128 4,268 465,985 Connecticut 0 0 1,253 228,585 0 129 0 229,710 Delaware 0 0 11,756 67,928 0 -31 0 79,716 District of Columbia 0 0 1,961 31,016 0 0 0 32,976 Florida 15,125 0 -5,102 1,208,317 0 0 0 1,218,340 Georgia 0 0 -10,315 459,390 75,641 2,542 701 522,874 Gulf of Mexico 1,812,328 0 -82 -1,711,029 0

488

Microsoft Word - table_26.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 26. Percent distribution of natural gas supply and disposition by state, 2011 Alabama 0.8 2.5 Alaska 1.5 1.4 Arizona < 1.2 Arkansas 4.7 1.2 California 1.0 8.8 Colorado 6.8 1.9 Connecticut -- 0.9 Delaware -- 0.3 District of Columbia -- 0.1 Florida 0.1 5.0 Georgia -- 2.1 Gulf of Mexico 7.9 0.4 Hawaii -- < Idaho -- 0.3 Illinois < 4.0 Indiana < 2.6 Iowa -- 1.3 Kansas 1.2 1.1 Kentucky 0.5 0.9 Louisiana 12.8 5.7 Maine -- 0.3 Maryland < 0.8 Massachusetts -- 1.8 Michigan 0.6 3.2 Minnesota -- 1.7 Mississippi 0.3 1.8 Missouri -- 1.1 Montana 0.3 0.3 Nebraska < 0.7 Nevada < 1.0 New Hampshire -- 0.3 New Jersey -- 2.7 New Mexico 5.0 1.0 New York 0.1

489

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.30 100.00 15.58 80.17 10.57 27.20 17.32 10.03 Alaska................................... 8.72 100.00 8.66 74.90 5.49 78.23 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.60 100.00 13.01 93.06 10.47 29.65 11.00 8.60 Arkansas............................... 14.09 100.00 11.32 64.49 10.56 3.87 -- 9.23 California .............................. 12.75 99.31 11.75 56.69 10.80 4.85 11.32 8.23 Colorado ............................... 9.77 100.00 9.01 95.24 8.76 0.56 13.57 7.02 Connecticut........................... 17.85 97.75 13.81 70.71 12.63 47.28 24.04 10.48 Delaware .............................. 16.07 100.00 14.24

490

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 129,337 79.22 115,449 76.41 114,699 76.48 R 114,325 R 75.97 103,662 72.80 Alaska................................... 15,472 33.10 16,582 31.35 11,619 36.94 5,934 30.04 1,304 21.77 Arizona ................................. 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 11,457 62.11 13,292 68.67 14,200 70.35 Arkansas............................... 94,613 94.06 84,177 94.77 83,347 95.22 82,213 95.85 81,841 96.13 California .............................. 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 690,491 94.32 699,283 94.69 726,927 95.15 Colorado ............................... 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41 110,565 99.38 116,699 99.55 119,032 99.44 Connecticut...........................

491

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Calais, ME .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 2,131 5.62 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 43,980 4.01 Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 113 4.49 Marysville, MI...................... 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 14,925 4.85 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 2,044 5.04 St. Clair, MI ......................... 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 R 492,235 R 8.96 612,369 4.62 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................

492

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2003-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 Alaska................................... 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 Arizona ................................. 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 Arkansas............................... 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 California .............................. 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 Colorado ............................... 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 Connecticut........................... 5.59 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 Delaware .............................. 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 Florida................................... 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 Georgia................................. 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15

493

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

4 4 Table 14. Underground natural gas storage capacity by state, December 31, 2012 (million cubic feet) Alabama 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 11,200 13,500 2 27,350 35,400 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12,178 21,853 2 12,178 21,853 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 349,296 592,411 14 349,296 592,411 Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 60,582 124,253 10 60,582 124,253 Illinois 0 0 0 17 215,594 779,862 11 87,368 220,070 28 302,962 999,931 Indiana 0 0 0 12 19,215 80,746 10 13,809 30,003 22 33,024 110,749 Iowa 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 Kansas 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,968 283,974 19 123,343 284,905 Kentucky 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana 11 200,702 297,020 0 0 0 7 211,780 402,626 18 412,482

494

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 115,449 76.4 114,699 76.5 114,325 76.0 103,662 72.8 94,597 72.1 Alaska................................... 16,582 31.4 11,619 36.9 5,934 30.0 1,304 21.8 1,827 27.5 Arizona ................................. 9,569 56.4 11,457 62.1 13,292 68.7 14,200 70.4 12,730 70.9 Arkansas............................... 84,177 94.8 83,347 95.2 82,213 95.8 81,841 96.1 74,752 96.4 California .............................. 738,704 94.5 690,491 94.3 699,283 94.7 R 683,512 R 94.9 673,034 95.3 Colorado ............................... 125,618 99.4 110,565 99.4 116,699 99.5 119,032 99.4 112,995 99.5 Connecticut...........................

495

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2006 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 484,711 12 484,711 5.82 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.18 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 881,037 11 103,731 29 984,768 11.82 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.37 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 275,200 0 0 4 275,200 3.30 Kansas.................................. 1 1,088 0 0 18 287,295 19 288,383 3.46 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 208,827 23 218,394

496

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2002-2006 (Million Cubic Feet) 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580 0 0 0 293,580 California................. 0 7,068 7,068 3,080 64,735 67,816 74,884 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,719,169 828,458 4,547,627 4,547,627 Louisiana ................ 125,481 11,711 137,192 NA NA NA 137,192 Texas...................... 54,672 2,391 57,063 NA NA NA 57,063 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010

497

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 Marysville, MI...................... 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 St. Clair, MI ......................... 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 524,065 8.98 Noyes, MN .......................... 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

498

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2004-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 9.84 Alaska................................... 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 6.74 Arizona ................................. 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 8.49 Arkansas............................... 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 8.88 California .............................. 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 8.11 Colorado ............................... 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 6.98 Connecticut........................... 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 10.24 Delaware .............................. 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 8.32 Florida................................... 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 9.73 Georgia................................. 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15 9.35

499

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2007-2011 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,782,708 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 Mexico 54,062 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 Total Pipeline Imports 3,836,770 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 LNG Algeria 77,299 0 0 0 0 Egypt 114,580 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 Equatorial Guinea 17,795 0 0 0 0 Nigeria 95,028 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 Norway 0 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 Peru 0 0 0 16,045 16,620 Qatar 18,352 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 Trinidad/Tobago 447,758 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 Yemen 0 0 0 38,897 60,071 Total LNG Imports 770,812 351,698

500

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.13 100.00 15.07 79.82 8.70 24.02 -- 7.19 Alaska................................... 8.68 100.00 7.57 76.01 4.67 69.96 -- 3.58 Arizona ................................. 17.21 100.00 12.84 93.36 10.49 31.33 9.40 6.84 Arkansas............................... 13.08 100.00 10.07 70.38 9.51 4.15 8.39 7.04 California .............................. 11.57 99.50 10.20 60.63 9.07 5.31 7.71 6.72 Colorado ............................... 8.84 100.00 8.10 95.70 7.21 0.45 8.72 4.35 Connecticut........................... 16.39 98.20 12.61 71.49 10.54 50.04 20.57 7.81 Delaware .............................. 16.21 100.00 14.48